(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Hearing"

SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC LIBRARY 



3 1223 06155 9309 



r—r-^ 



5* CLOSED 

m 



aOVEHNM!"- -of, cir NTEn 

SAN Ft*\i ).....« LIBRARY 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 

REFERENCE 
BOOK 

Not /o be taken from I he Library 



3 1223 06155 9309 



LbOO 

ho.zl 



HEARING 

SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 




STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 113 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5, 1992 
1:55 P.M. 



DGCUM£M» DEPT. 



207-R 



1 !| 

2 | 

3 

'i 

4 
5 
6 

7 

8 

i 
9 

I 
10 

11 

12 ;! 

13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 



Reported by: 



SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



HEARING 



STATE CAPITOL 
ROOM 113 
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5, 1992 
1:55 P.M. 



Evelyn J. Mizak 
28 Shorthand Reporter 



6 47594 SFPL: ECONO JRS 
171 SFPL 09/28/01 26 



1 

2 

i 
'! 

3 
4 
5 
6 

7 

8 ; 

ii 

9 II 

10 
11 
12 
13 

14 
15 



IX 



APPEARANCES 
MEMBERS PRESENT 
SENATOR DAVID ROBERTI, Chair 
SENATOR WILLIAM CRAVEN, Vice Chair 
SENATOR NICHOLAS PETRIS 
SENATOR ROBERT BEVERLY 
SENATOR HENRY MELLO 

STAFF PRESENT 
CLIFF BERG, Executive Officer 
PAT WEBB, Committee Secretary 
RICK ROLLENS, Consultant on Bill Referrals 
NANCY MICHEL, Consultant on Governor's Appointments 

ALSO PRESENT 



ELAINE W. DONALDSON, Member 

16 Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board 

17 DOROTHY J. LEE, Member 
State Board of Education 

18 

JOE STEIN, President 

19 State Board of Education 

20 GUS OWEN, Member 

Fish and Game Commission 

21 j 

MARK J. PALMER, Legislative Advocate 

22 Mountain Lion Foundation 

23 IVONNE RAMOS RICHARDSON, Member 
Agricultural Labor Relations Board 

24 

ROBERTO VELLANOWETH 

25 American 6.1. Forum 

26 OTIS THURMAN, Warden 

California State Prison at Lancaster 

27 

BEA MOLINA 
28 Mexican-American Political Association 



1 

I! 

2 APPEARANCES (CONTINUED) 

3 REGIS LANE, Union Representative 
Corcoran State Prison Chapter 

4 CCPOA 

5 LEON RALPH, Former Assemblyman 
Association of Black Correctional Workers 



iii 



6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



TED RICH 



IV 

1 

i INDEX 

2 || 

Page 

3 

Proceedings 1 

4 

5 Governor's Appointees; 

6 ELAINE W. DONALDSON, Member 

Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board 1 

7 

Background and Experience 1 

8 | 

Motion to Confirm 2 

9 ! 

i 

io ;! 



Committee Action 2 



DOROTHY J. LEE, Member 

11 State Board of Education 3 

12 Background and Experience 3 

13 Chapter Two Committee 3 

14 Educational Technology Commission 4 

15 Witness in Support; 

16 JOE STEIN, President 

State Board of Education 6 

17 
18 
19 
20 

21 

22 i 



Questions by SENATOR MELLO re; 

Newspaper Ad to Raise Gas Tax 6 

Diplomas that Mean Something 10 

Necessity for More Money for Schools 11 

Response by MR. STEIN 12 



Ranking with Other States vis-a-vis 

23 Education Funding 13 

24 Need to Cut Waste and High 

Administrative Salaries 13 

25 
26 



Questions by SENATOR PETRIS re; 



Worst Record in Country on Number of Library 
27 Books Available in Public Schools and Number 

of Certified Public School Librarians 15 

28 



1 

2 Functional Illiterates Graduating 17 

3 Board's Position on the Library Issues 18 

4 Motion to Confirm 19 

5 Committee Action 20 

6 GUS OWEN, Member 

Fish and Game Commission 20 

7 

8 

9 

10 



Background and Experience 20 

California Institute 22 

Witness in Support; 



MARK PALMER, Legislative Advocate 

11 Mountain Lion Foundation 23 

12 Questions by SENATOR MELLO re: 

13 Status of the Hunt of Mountain Lions 25 

14 Mountain Lion Population 25 

15 Motion to Confirm 26 

16 Committee Action 26 

17 YVONNE RAMOS RICHARDSON, Member 

Agricultural Labor Relations Board 27 

18 

19 

20 

ROBERTO VELLANOWETH 
21 American G.I. Forum 29 



Background and Experience 27 

Witness in Support: 



22 Questions by SENATOR MELLO re: 

23 Persons Serving on Board Currently 30 

24 Legislative Intent 31 

25 Deterioration of Board 32 

26 Direction Board Is Heading 32 

27 Statistics 33 

28 



VI 



i 



2 Authority of General Counsel vs. Board's 

Authority 34 



Drop in Unfair Labor Practice Charges 35 

Low Settlements of Large Claims 36 



3 

4 
5 

Allegation of Discussion of Case(s) with Scott 

6 and Marty Wilson 37 

7 Motion to Confirm 39 

8 Committee Action 40 

9 OTIS THURMAN, Warden 

California State Prison at Lancaster 40 

10 

n 

12 



Background and Experience 40 

Witnesses in Support: 



BEA MOLINA 

13 Mexican-American Poplitical Association 42 

14 REGIS LANE, Union Representative 
Corcoran State Prison 

15 Local Chapter, CCPOA 43 

16 Questions by SENATOR PETRIS re: 

17 Duties of Correctional Counselors 44 

18 Filing of Statements relating to Parole 
Eligibility 45 

19 

LEON RALPH, Former Assemblyman 

20 Association of Black Correctional Workers 46 

21 TED RICH 48 

22 Motion to Confirm 49 

23 Committee Action 50 

24 Termination of Proceedings 50 

25 Certificate of Reporter 51 

26 

27 
28 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



1 
!| 

P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 

— ooOoo — 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Elaine W. Donaldson, Member, 
Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board. 

Ms. Donaldson, if you will come up, please, and we 
will tell you, as you're getting seated, we'll ask you, as we do 
all appointees, why do you feel that you are qualified for this 
important post? 

MS. DONALDSON: Thank you, Vice Chairman Craven and 
Members of the Committee. 

My name is Elaine Donaldson. I am Chairman of the 
Cal-OSHA Appeals Board. 

First of all, I want to thank the Committee for 
confirming me four years ago and eight years ago. I'm in my 
ninth year of serving on this — in this capacity. The first 
three, attacking and completing an inherited backlog of 200 
reconsiderations, or petitions for reconsideration; the next two 
years coping with the process of disengagement. 

In 1986, December, the — those petitions were 
finished and we were completely up to date. In January of '87, 
the Governor decided that he was going to do away with Cal-OSHA. 
We spent two years coping with that, and then a year coming back 
to speed, and in 1990, we spent redefining our future operations 
and planning for updating our equipment. 

I feel that the Appeals Board has done — has done an 
admirable job over the past eight years. I still find it 
exciting, satisfying, and I would like to continue to serve in 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 
25 

26 

: _ 

28 



2 

that capacity, and I ask for your support. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much. 

Is there anyone here who wishes to testify in favor 
of the appointee? There appears to be none. 

Is anyone in objection? There are none. 

Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Move the Committee recommend 
approval of the confirmation. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good. 

Call the roll, please. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 

Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 

Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

Senator Roberti. 

Four to zero. 

[Thereupon the final vote for 
confirmation was 5-0, as Senator 
Roberti 's aye vote was added 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



3 
pursuant to Senate Rule 28.7] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Four to zero; confirmed, to the 
Floor. 

MS. DONALDSON: Thank you very much, gentlemen. I 
appreciate it. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you, Ms. Donaldson. 

Next is Dorothy J. Lee, Member, State Board of 
Education. 

Ms. Lee, good afternoon. We'll ask you to tell us 
the same thing, if you will, as to why you feel you're qualified 
for this post? 

MS. LEE: Senator Craven, a special welcome back to 
you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you, you're very kind. I 
appreciate it. 

MS. LEE: Members of the Committee, good afternoon. 

I am both honored and pleased to be invited to appear 
at this hearing. Since my previous confirmation hearing on June 
27th, 1990, I have endeavored to bring my expertise as a 
classroom teacher to the State Board of Education and to an 
educational committee and a commission. 

In addition to serving on the Board of Education for 
the past two years, I was privileged to serve as liaison to the 
Governor's Chapter Two Committee and as a member of the 
Educational Technology Commission. 

On the Chapter Two Committee, I was able to hear 
first-hand the many worthwhile projects funded by federal funds 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



4 
for the study of mathematics, local government, and moral and 
civic values. I am particularly proud of being a part of the 
Committee that was responsible for "The Moral and Civic 
Education Handbook." This handbook was distributed to every 
California public school teacher. I have copies for each of you 
as well. That is this one, here. 

The Education Code proscribes the duty of teachers 
concerning morals and citizenship as follows: 

"Impress upon the minds of the 
pupils the principles of morality, 
truth, justice, patriotism, and a 
true comprehension of the rights, 
duties, and dignity of American 
citizenship. " 
Successful teachers strive to meet these goals as they continue 
to light that spark in each student in his or her quest for 
learning. 

The Educational Technology California Master Plan was 
established by AB 1470 to develop objectives for all the state's 
students, including those with limited English abilities. The 
Commission defined the program that provides for the equity of 
resources and access to technology which will be coordinated 
from K-12, and in the community colleges, the California State 
University system, and the University of California system. I 
also have copies of the Master Plan for each of you, and a small 
brochure, because I know your time is very limited. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: The Sergeant will distribute those. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



5 

MS. LEE: The future of public education in 
California is challenging with a growth in student population. 
I want to be a part of meeting this challenge, and I'm looking 
forward to seeing the implementation of the exciting school 
reform programs as outlined in the publications: Here They 
Come, Ready or Not; It's Elementary; Caught in the Middle; 
Second to None. These reports have been enthusiastically 
receive by teachers throughout the State of California. 

I taught a kindergarten class that graduates from 
high school in the year 2000. I think that was one of my 
greatest thrills. 

For that and other reasons, I am pleased with the 
recommendations in the reports, for children today will be 
expected to participate in a society far more complex than 
previous generations. These students must have skills necessary 
to compete in the highly competitive and technical job market. 

In this country's diverse population, teachers are 
asked to do so much with so little. These teachers meet every 
charge and every challenge with professionalism and excellence. 
There is no other country in the world which provides education 
for all students at all times. 

We have a right to be proud of our system of 
education. Still, our educational system will see some 
challenging times ahead, and it will require from all of us 
vigorous and continuous effort to sustain the schools and 
preserve them for succeeding generations of students. 

I ask that you allow me to continue to serve on the 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



6 
California State Board of Education. In return, I promise you 
the students, both current and future, and the people of this 
great state, that I will put forth vigorous and continuous 
effort. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much. 

Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to support 
the nominee? One gentleman, fine. Please come up, state your 
name. 

MR. STEIN: My name is Joe Stein. I'm President of 
the State Board of Education. 

Welcome back, Senator Craven. It's nice to see you 
in your appointed place. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you. 

MR. STEIN: You've heard a wonderful statement from 
Dorothy Lee. Last month I was here to support the nomination 
and the appointment of Mr. Benjamin Montoya, and I'm hoping that 
that will reach the Floor and we'll hear good news on that one 
as well. 

I address you as a strong supporter of the 
confirmation of Dorothy J. Lee's appointment to the State Board 
of Education. I'm very proud to say that I was the first person 
to approach her and then recommend her as an appointee to the 
Board. 

If Dorothy Lee could be cloned and placed in every 
classroom, there would be a dramatic immediate improvement in 
student performance and in the quality of education. Having 
served as a deeply involved citizen, classroom teacher, deputy 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



7 
principal, education advocate for over 30 years, and receiving 
nomination as Teacher of the Year, Dorothy brings to our Board 
some very special credentials. Although she has many others, I 
will mention only two. 

First is the viewpoint of one who serves — and use 
the word advisedly — our children in the front lines and has 
achieved an enviable and commendable record of success. 

Second is the thoughtful dedication which guides her 
pragmatic decision making without diluting her high principles. 

Dorothy Lee has been an outstanding example of a 
Board member, never shirking responsibility, and always willing 
to give selflessly of her time and many talents on behalf of 
students . 

We are indeed fortunate to have Dorothy Lee on the 
State Board of Education, and I fervently urge your affirmative 
vote on recommending her confirmation to the full Senate. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much. 

Anyone else? No. 

Any comment from the Members? Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Mr. Chairman, a thought comes to 
mind. Perhaps Mr. Stein would like to answer this also. It's 
not very often that we get two people up here at one time. 

About two weeks ago, there was a gentleman, a 
business person in California, that ran full-page ads in the 
papers throughout California. His firm, I remember the name of 
his firm, it's called Acutune; they provide tune-ups to cars and 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



8 
everything. And he advocated raising the gasoline tax 20 cents 
a gallon to put that money into schools. And the reason for his 
statement is that he was just shocked at the fact that people 
graduated from our schools can't even read and write and do 
simple math when they come in to get a job. 

You know, everybody's talking about how great things 
are going in our schools, I really think — and I'm not blaming 
you for this, or Mr. Stein — but the fact that the Governor 
wants to cut education by 2.3 billion, and I think California's 
now fallen to an all-time low as far as — in fact with his 
plan, we would be behind the sates of Louisiana and South 
Carolina in funding for education. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Forty-first, I think. 

SENATOR MELLO: We've become the 41st state. I'm not 
happy with that at all. 

I'm just wondering, from people being on the School 
Board, my goodness, what do we do with the tremendous growth in 
our school system, the fact that people can't even read and 
write, graduating; they're being given a diploma. I think 
that's the most shocking thing in the world. 

And this gentleman came forward from the business 
community and said, "Let's raise taxes to save our schools and 
our state," and he also had another goal. I forget what they 
were. 

So, I'd just like to hear your comments from that, if 
you're proud with the status guo. I sure am not. I just want 
to lend my part to try to help improve our schools. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



9 

I think that's your goal, but I just — how do we do 
it? 

MS. LEE: Well, there is one thing about our teaching 
staff. Our teaching staff is very dedicated, and they are 
advocates for children. And it seems that regardless of the 
financial [sic], they're all in there plugging, and they spend 
their own money. They spend their own time supporting 
education, the education of children. 

And of course in California, we have 82 different 
languages, so this is one of our greatest challenges. We have 
82 — over 82 languages in the City of Los Angeles alone. So, 
we are doing all that we can. We have special reading teachers. 
We have the Miller-Unruh program, and all of these special 
teachers help. And that's one thing we do with our Chapter Two 
federal funding, too. 

Although, I truly am a firm believer that education 
is a local control, state-controlled thing, and you know, as 
long as we have this recession, and we have the earthquake, and 
the flood, and it's — and then with the defense, a lot of 
companies leaving California, it's a very difficult thing. 

We have probably 200,000 students moving into 
California every year; 10,000 people moving in every month, as 
you all know. If we built 16 school rooms a day, we wouldn't 
have enough to accommodate everyone. 

So we just, a teaching staff, we just — we try, and 
we do the best with what we can. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



10 

We're doing a wonderful job with our bilingual 
i 1 
program. The school that I'm in is over 50 percent bilingual. 

We have some wonderful, wonderful bilingual teachers. We have 

some great institutions: USC, the State University system at 

Cal Poly. We have eight new teachers at our school from — that 

came out of Cal Poly highly trained and wonderful, dedicated 

teachers . 

SENATOR MELLO: I agree, the teachers are working 
hard, dedicated, as are many others, but I really — only about 
ijsix percent of our funding comes from the federal government. 

MS. LEE: Right. 

SENATOR MELLO: Funding for education is pretty much 
state and local. 

MS. LEE: Right. 

SENATOR MELLO: I have a bill on bilingual education, 
and I agree with you. I think my goal is to have people learn 
English. 

But right now, even English-speaking kids aren't 
learning how to speak, and do math, and get enough education in 
our public school system to even get a basic, entry-level job. 
That's what I want you to kind of respond to. 

How do we get people more qualified with a diploma 

ii 

that'll mean something? 

MS. LEE: Like I say, we just try — try our best. 
We do have special reading teachers, and we have a new math 
program . 

SENATOR MELLO: Let me ask you a different question. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



11 

Do the schools need more money? 

MS. LEE: I think the schools can use more money, but 
on the local level, we're there, and they just say, you know, 
you cut your funds, and we just seem to cut and cut and cut 
because the money isn't there. And we just feel that the 
Legislature, whatever money we have, the school districts have 
to wait, and each year, and find out how much money — 

SENATOR MELLO: This is a final point I want to make. 

This gentleman that ran this ad, he got 750 letters 
back. Three of them were negative towards him wanting to raise 
gas taxes, but the rest of them, 747, were positive. And they 
gave him a great congratulations for taking the leadership and 
running an ad to try to do something about — 

MS. LEE: Well actually, the public — I don't mean 
to interrupt you — the public schools are doing a great job. 
They're doing a great job with the students. 

SENATOR MELLO: Well, yeah, I think they're doing all 
— and we're partly to blame up here for not providing. I think 
they need more money, because with 200,000 or 245,000 new 
students, it takes more teachers, classrooms, buses, books and 
everything . 

But I'm just going by the fact that there's so many 
of our children are — they're dropping out; they're not going 
on to university. 

MS. LEE: Well, that is one of our challenges, that 
each student will attain marketable skills. That is the 
challenge of education today. 



I 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



12 

SENATOR MELLO: I'm embarrassed. When people 

li 

graduate, they — what do they graduate them for? 

MS. LEE: The high school reform, Second to None, I 
think that's why the high schools are very excited about that, 
because it kind of is a partnership between business and 
education, that students in high school will be out working on 
the job as part of their academic program. 

MR. STEIN: Senator, the reason I came back to the 
table, I think, in my own mind, we have to be careful in 
equating dollars spent and improvement. And one of the things 
that the Board is very concerned about, and has been concerned 
about for the last two or three years, is accountability. And 
we feel that there are a lot of dollars. There are 29 — close 
to $29 billion being used for K-12 education. That's the 
largest sum of money used for any particular entity in the 
state. And I think we have to stretch those dollars under the 
trying circumstances to the maximum. 

There are people that say we don't need more money; 
we need more accountability. And you can come down on either 
side of the argument on that. 

As far as the priorities of the school — of the 
State Board this year, we chose to tackle three goals, one of 
which is school -to-work transition. And I was in Philadelphia 
three days just last week, meeting with presidents of state 
boards of educations from around the country, 30 states to be 
exact, and that is — that was the subject of the conference. 
We're hoping that we can get private enterprise, we can get 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



13 
business, to help us in this, because the state just doesn't 
have the money to — to ante up. 

SENATOR MELLO: Yes, but being more accountable, I 
agree we ought to cut out the waste in some of these big — I 
was — the other day, in L.A. Unified, somebody passed away — 
passed around a memo showing the salaries for the top brass of 
L.A. Unified School District, starting at 192,000. And the 
peons, sort of middle management, got 120,000. 

But the point is, let's face it, and compared with 50 
states in the ADA support in dollars, we will be ranking 
fortieth. 

MR. STEIN: But where — but where are the results? 
States that have less ADA but are getting better test results. 

So, I think we — so, that's why I say, it's hard to 
equate the dollars putting in unless you see what you're getting 
for those dollars. 

I think we can get a better stretch for the dollar. 
We'll have to, under the circumstances. 

SENATOR MELLO: The way it looks right now, let me 
get my chart, Mississippi is below us — 

MR. STEIN: That's true. 

SENATOR MELLO: — Georgia, and there's about ten 
states that are below us. I think that states that are — like, 
New York is putting in more money into education than we are. 

So, I don't know. I say we ought to cut out the 
waste, and cut out some of these high salaries we have in our 
schools, and get more money in the classroom. 



14 
1 

But I think even with all the economy in the world, 

2 

we're just not hacking it as far as — accountability ought to 
3 

lead to the children who are there graduating, and emphasize 

4 

instruction. 

5 

And I really appreciate both of you coming forward, 

6 

because — 

7 

MR. STEIN: We agree 100 percent. 

8 

SENATOR MELLO: — you're the ones who are going to 
9 

make these decisions on the state level. We just have to do 

10 

something, otherwise, California's going to erode further 

N '! 

without having — the basic K-12 is important. 
12 

The more money you spoke about is for 5 million 
13 

students . 
14 ; 

MR. STEIN: That's right. 

15 

SENATOR MELLO: That's a lot of students. And I hope 

16 ! 

that they get a good education, go on to college, community 
college, and the university, and get post-graduate work. That's 

18 ;i 

going to be the answer ultimately, but it's not going to happen 
19 

unless, somehow, the parents, and the schools, and the 

20 

government, and everybody working together has got to do a 

21 

better job. 

22 

Thank you both very much. 

23 

MR. STEIN: Thank you, Senator. 

24 | 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you. 

25 

You've answered it, Dorothy; that's fine. 

26 

Senator Petris. 

27 

SENATOR PETRIS: Yes, I'd like to follow through. 

28 ' 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



15 
Just following up on what Senator Mello said, we're all very 
concerned . 

It's nice to hear that our schools are doing a 
wonderful job, but that isn't borne out by the reports. I don't 
know of one report that says that. Here and there you see a 
little bit of an increase in the test scores. 

It's not all a matter of money, although money plays 
a big part. Teachers in the district where I live buy supplies 
and things out of their own pockets. So, I don't think 
administrators are paying for those supplies; it's the teacher 
in the classroom. 

Just recently, we had the National Convention of the 
American Library Association in San Francisco. They reminded us 
that we're number 50 in the country in two important categories. 
One is the number of books available in our public school 

libraries; number 50. 

i 

It seems to me the minute the members of the Board of 
Education read that, they should have sprung into action and go 
knock on the Governor's door, all the doors necessary, and say, 
"Hey, we don't have enough books in our system." 

Secondly, we have the worst record in the country on 
the number of public school librarians who are certified. I 
guess the janitors are running the libraries. I've been in 
schools where the library's in the cafeteria. I mean, that's 
disgraceful! 

There are schools right here in this county where the 
libraries are in the cafeteria, which is already being used for 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



16 
multipurpose, for plays, and programs, and everything else. The 
library ought to be in a different place by itself. That's a 
function of money, but not everything is. 

Now, how can you say they're doing a wonderful job? 
I don't understand that. 

MS. LEE: We try, I guess, do what we can. Now, 
there is a — 

SENATOR PETRIS: That's a little different. 

MS. LEE: There is a lot of school reform going on in 

California. For instance, in my district just today, it came 

i 

out in the paper that thee school board had made a decision — 

our superintendent is leaving to go to Chicago, and at a larger 

raise and a smaller district. We have 15,000 students in our 

district. He's going to an elementary district, and our 

district is unified with two high schools. He's going to an 

elementary district west of Chicago, Bensonville, Illinois. And 

he will be receiving a salary of $100,000 a year. 

And there is — there are eleven districts that have 
been chosen nationwide to have a brand-new school system, with a 
lot of money contributed by these private companies. And after 
he leaves, the district, our district, is not going to rehire a 
superintendent. The board is not planning to. They're planning 
to have a lot of administrators get together as a group to — 
and I guess the assistant superintendents, so that we can save 
his salary, which is $88,000. 

And I — the last time that I spoke with 
Dr. Calderelli — he used to be in Martinez and then he went to 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



17 
Ventura; he's been our superintendent for four years — 
Dr. Calderelli said there is going to be a great amount of 
reform as far as the administration is concerned. It looks like 
Ventura is thinking seriously about carrying that out. 

So, that is one way that we will be — 

SENATOR PETRIS: If they're doing such a great job, 
we wouldn't need reform; would we? I suppose you can always do 
a little better, but — 

MS. LEE: As a teacher, I like to be optimistic, and 
we are. 

And in our district, we do have statistics that show 
us that now we have more — more of our high school seniors have 
been accepted at Stanford and Berkeley than ever before, which 
is something that I'm very proud of. 

Usually in Ventura, we have two students accepted at 
Stanford, and this year we had nine or ten students, seniors, in 
a small high school at Ventura High, so we're very proud of 
that . 

We — we just keep working harder and keep plugging 
at it. 

SENATOR PETRIS: How are we doing around the rest of 
the state? How are we doing in some of the bigger cities? How 
are we doing in L.A., San Diego, San Francisco? 

We've got functional illiterates coming out of a lot 
of those districts. The employers tell us they can't even read 
the instructions on how to do a particular job. You send them 
to the supermarket with a list of groceries — this has been 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



18 
done over and over — a list of groceries, and challenge them to 
do a particular function, either find the ones that' re the 
cheapest or whatever, they can't handle it. These are high 
school graduates with a diploma that Senator Mello was telling 
us about. It's really sad. 

MS. LEE: No, our students — my parents have a 
grocery store in Ventura, and I worked there in the evenings, 
and so — we do have high school students where they have an 
assignment like that. What they do is, they go to Von's, go to 
Ralph's, and go someplace else, and they, you know, they go and 
see how much all the items are and figure it out. They — they 
do that very successfully. 

So, I — I haven't seen a lot of those students that 

you're speaking of in our district. I know a lot of times — 
i 

SENATOR PETRIS: No, I'm speaking to you from the 

statewide viewpoint as a Board member. Maybe in your district 

it's a lot better; I hope it is. 

Don't you think the Board should be doing something 
about this library and book situation? 

MS. LEE: Yes, that is a concern because there's so 
many librarians, you're right, that are being eliminated from 
all the districts. It seems like when the district needs to cut 
funds, they cut the librarian, which is really a shame. 

I know at our school, like I say — I have my own 
experience with my school — we did have to move the library 
because we had — we're right at the northern border of Los 
Angeles County, and our school was just so full that we had to 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



19 
take our library and use it for a classroom. Then we had to use 
our auditorium for a classroom. So, we're using our remedial 
reading room, kind of like a little conference room, for our 
library. And we do have — 

SENATOR PETRIS: Well, now, that's not satisfactory, 
is it? 

MS. LEE: No, no, it's not, but we don't have enough 
rooms for all the students. We have so many students enrolling. 

So, that is one of the things that we need to work 
on, more buildings, construction. I was real happy to see that 
one of our initiatives was passed, propositions, where we will 
have more funding for school buildings. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Okay, thank you very much. 

Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I guess we can't expect Ms. Lee to 
solve our budget problems when 120 of us haven't been able to do 
it yet. 

However, notwithstanding that, I move approval of the 
nomination. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Beverly moves. 

Would you call the roll, please. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 



1 

2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



Floor. 



20 
SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 
Senator Petris. 
SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 
Senator Craven. 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 
Senator Roberti. 
Four to zero. 

[Thereupon the final vote for 

confirmation was 5-0, as Senator 

Robert i's aye vote was added 

pursuant to Senate Rule 28.7] 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Four to zero; the issue is to the 



[Thereupon the Senate Rules 
Committee acted upon legislative 
agenda items . ] 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Let's go back to appointees. Next 
is Mr. Gus Owen, Member, Fish and Game Commission. 

MR. OWEN: Thank you, Senator Craven, Senators. 
Thank you for the time and your indulgence this 
afternoon. 

I would like, if I could, I would like to go back a 
little bit in history about one of the reasons that I'm 
interested in the Fish and Game Commission here today. 

That is, I lived on a tenant farm in Oklahoma when I 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



21 

was a young boy. We had turkey, deer, black bear even in those 
days; ate quite a few possum also in those days, which is kind 
of unusual, being a rodent, but in those days, when you were a 
tenant farmer, you had to. 

I came out here at the young age of 15 on my own. 
Eventually went into the Marine Corps and went to Korea. Came 
back and became a surfer and a skin diver along the coast here. 
I became well acquainted with the marine life. 

We used to have white sea bass, yellowtail, lobster 
— 16 pounder I got at Crescent Cove in north Laguna. That was 
back in about 1957; it's not too long ago. We were able to get 
scallops, abalone, pinks and reds, even. 

Nowadays, those things are gone because the state has 
changed considerably. We've moved up to 30 million people. 
I've been a part of the process and so has each one of us. I 
have three children; they will have children. And we still have 
people coming across our borders, coming from Oklahoma and 
Arkansas, for a better opportunity. 

And I thought that this would be a great opportunity 
for me, as much as I've experienced of this state, that I could 
give back something to the state by participating in the Fish 
and Game Commission and learning something about the rest of our 
state. 

I've been a hunter for a number of years. I quit 
that a few years ago because I found the necessity was no longer 
there, and I didn't know what to do with all of the deer meat. 
Now then, when I go hunting for elk in Montana or someplace, I 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



22 
hope that I never shoot one, because I'd probably have a heart 
attack trying to get it out of the hills. 

But this is kind of the way it is. And I really 
enjoy the State of California. I think I have an awful lot to 
contribute. 

I'd like to restore some of the things that we can, 
where we can; an awful lot of it, we can't at the present time 
due to the water situation. Some of it we can't due to the 
build-out throughout the state. 

But I think there are opportunities for me. I'm Vice 
Chairman of the California Institute, which was formed just 
about a year and a half ago, two years ago. And the California 
Institute is comprised of four Republicans and four Democrats in 
the State of California. Our job is to bring together the 
delegation on issues of common interest back in Washington, D.C. 
That includes our two Senators and the Governor's Office. And I 
have been working through that to try to identify new sources of 
funds for the Fish and Game, because there was some legislation 
passed many years ago that kind of short-changed us, I believe, 
where we're getting less than our 12 percent that we should be 
getting. And so, we're looking into that through the California 
Institute and our staff back there. 

I do have a letter here from the Mountain Lion 
Foundation which I'm very pleased with. I think it's in your 
packet. I also have met with a number of the people involved 
with the environmental and saving the animals, and so forth, and 
too numerous to mention, probably, but I think that I can work 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 
->-> 

23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



23 
with the people from those areas, also from the development 
community, and also the ranchers, property owners, up and down 
the State of California. 

I can bring to the Commission a certain amount of 
common sense. It already has that, but I know that I have 
survived by the utilization of common sense and the lack of an 
education here in this great state. And I'd like to continue to 
do that, contribute my part and my share to the Commission. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Fine, thank you very much, sir. 

Anyone in the audience like to speak in favor of the 
appointee? 

MR. PALMER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the 
Committee. 

I'm Mark Palmer. I'm with the Mountain Lion 
Foundation. 

We met with Gus Owen a few weeks ago, and we have 
been talking with him and watching his career. And I guess the 
basic message I'd like to give with you is that we feel that 
Mr. Owen is willing to work with us, and we hope he continues to 
work with us, and that being the case, we're willing to work 
with him. 

We did have a great deal of nervousness when he was 
first appointed because of his background. Some of the 
statements he made before the Fish and Game Commission in those 
first initial meetings caused some concerns, and his opposition 
to some listings of endangered species. 

However, he's come a long way from that. We've been 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



24 
impressed that he's changed his position. Getting more 
information for him has allowed him to change his position on 
the listing of some of these critical areas of rare and 
endangered species. 

We think he's interested in changing the way that the 
Fish and Game Commission works. We've had a lot of concern 
about that, as you know. We brought it to this Committee over 
the years. And I think Mr. Owen will help us, and will help the 
other members of the Commission to get along. 

So, rather than some of the rigidity we've seen in 
past administration appointments — not this administration, but 
the Deukmejian administration — appointments to the Fish and 
Game Commission, we think we can work with Mr. Owen. We're 
impressed with that. 

I did want to point out particularly the bobcat 
issue, which is going to come back up before the Commission, and 
also before the State Senate. We will be bringing that issue to 
the Legislature. Bobcat trapping is occurring in California, 
and it's a great concern of ours as it's currently conducted. 

In any event, again, as basically a wind-up, we think 
we can work with him. We're willing to work with him and keep 
the lines of communication open. 

Thanks very much for your help. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much, sir. 

SENATOR MELLO: Question. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Yes, Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Mr. Chairman, may I ask, what's the 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



25 
status now of the hunt of mountain lions? Has it been set aside 
by a moratorium, a court action, or are they being hunted? 

MR. PALMER: Mountain lions statewide — Proposition 
117, which was passed by the voters in 1990, permanently 
prohibits trophy hunting of mountain lions, so they cannot be 
hunted for sport. 

However, there are provisions in there for killing 
mountain lion in the case of public safety, in the case of 
depredations, the damage to livestock and whatnot. So, there 
are still lions being killed. 

We've been trying to work with the Department of Fish 
and Game to come up with some public education programs to help 
both protect public health and public safety, as well as 
livestock, and at the same time, prevent lions from being killed 
willy-nilly. 

SENATOR MELLO: Is the population on the increase 
then? 

MR. PALMER: We don't know. That's a good question. 
There's not a whole lot of statewide research that's been going 
on. 

The Department of Fish and Game claims the population 
is increasing. We think it may be due to the drought, that 
we're seeing more mountain lions, and therefore it seems like 
there are more. 

We can't really answer that question without 
statewide research. 

SENATOR MELLO: Thank you. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



26 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good. 

MR. PALMER: Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Is there anyone else in favor? 
Anyone in opposition? There appears to be none; no one. 

What's your pleasure, gentlemen? 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I'm pleased to move the approval of 
the nomination. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very well, Senator Beverly moves. 

Call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 

Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 

Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

Senator Robert i. 

Four to zero. 

[Thereupon the final vote for 
confirmation was 5-0, as Senator 
Roberti's aye vote was added 
pursuant to Senate Rule 28.7] 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



27 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Nomination to the Floor. 

Congratulations, Gus. 

MR. OWEN: Thank you. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I hesitated, Mr. Chairman. I was 
waiting to hear from Mr. Mccracken. I didn't know what he had 
in mind. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: No, I think Mr. McCracken has 
retired, actually. 

MR. MCCRACKEN: Again. 

! 

i 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Again, that's right. 

MR. McCRACKEN: I was part of that former 
administration that Mark was talking about. 

[ Laughter . ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good. Always nice to have you 
here. 

Next is Yvonne Ramos Richardson, Member, Agricultural 
Labor Relations Board. 

MS. RICHARDSON: Good afternoon, Senator Craven. 
Welcome back. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Good afternoon. Nice to see you 
again. 

MS. RICHARDSON: Members of the Committee, I'm here 
once again before you seeking your positive recommendation for 
confirmation to the position of member of the Agricultural Labor 
Relations Board. 

I was first appointed to the Board on March 1st, 
1987. And at that time, I brought to the Board the expertise of 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



28 
a labor relations practitioner with over 15 years of experience 

I! 

in personnel labor relations, including nine years as the chief 
negotiator at both the county and state levels. 

I had also served for two and a half years in the 
Yolo County Arbitration Panel. I had been appointed by the 
Board of Supervisors. That Panel rendered final and binding 
decisions on labor disputes between unions and management, and 
also on disciplinary matters, including all county employees. 

In the last five years that I have served on the 
Board, I have participated in 93 decisions and over 150 Board 
orders. Every case has been challenging and unique, and I have 
only let the facts and merits of the case guide me in reaching 
my final decision. 

ji The Agricultural Labor Relations Act was passed by 

this Legislature and signed into law for the purpose of ensuring 
peace in the agriculture fields by guaranteeing collective 
bargaining rights for the farmworkers, and to provide for a 
process of the resolution of labor disputes. 

The ALRB was needed then and it's needed now. The 
need to organize and to be represented by the farmworkers is 
still there, necessitating the conduct of elections. Labor 
disputes still arise between the parties, necessitating the 
adjudication of unfair labor practice charges. And we still see 
violence out there in the fields which require both the 
intervention of the General Counsel and the Board. 

The body of law that has been developed by this Board 
over the last 17 years has served the farmworkers, the unions, 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



29 
the growers, and the people of California well. I feel proud to 
have served on the Board, and I'm even more proud of my record. 

For all the above reasons, I seek your positive 
recommendation for my confirmation. And if there are any 
questions, I'll be glad to answer them. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good, thank you very much. 

Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak 
in favor of the appointee? Yes, sir, would you come forward. 
State your name. 

MR. VELLANOWETH : Senator Craven, welcome back. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you. 

MR. VELLANOWETH: Senator Mello, Senator Beverly, 
Senator Petris, my name is Roberto Vellanoweth. 

I'm here in support of Yvonne Ramos Richardson, 
representing the American G.I. Forum. I've been here before 
representing the American G.I. Forum and other organizations. 

In this particular case, I'm very proud to support 
the confirmation of Yvonne, having known her to be a very 
encouraging person to the farmworker. She is fair, dependable, 
and I strongly support her confirmation. 

Thank you very much. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank your very much. 

Anyone else? Anyone in opposition? There appears to 
be no one. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Just a couple of questions. 

We had a chance to talk yesterday, and I learned the 



30 
1 

Board is now down to two members. Yourself, and who's the other 

2 

person? 
3 i: 

MS. RICHARDSON: I am pleased to say that we're now 



i 



4 

back to three. 

5 



6 

7 
8 

get — 

9 



SENATOR MELLO: One got appointed today; right? 

MS. RICHARDSON: Yesterday. 

SENATOR MELLO: Son of a gun. Hopefully, that will 



10 

n 

12 
13 

14 

1 
i 

15 
16 

17 

18 

19 j| 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 , 

25 

26 

27 

28 



MS. RICHARDSON: We do have a quorum. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: This is what former Senator Ellis 
was a member of; right? 

MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, and he left on June 30th, and 
his replacement was appointed yesterday. 

SENATOR MELLO: Member Jim Nielsen? 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Is Jim Nielsen on that now? 

MS. RICHARDSON: No, Jim Nielsen left in February. 
His name was removed, and so — 

SENATOR MELLO: Who's the other gentleman that was 
there with you prior to the appointment? 

MS. RICHARDSON: Jim Ellis. 

SENATOR MELLO: I mean, you said you were down to two 
members prior to — 

MS. RICHARDSON: Oh, Chairman Bruce Janigian and 
myself, and now we're up to — back to three. 

SENATOR MELLO: The questions I have, I went over 
some of these things with you. What I'm concerned about is just 
the overall, the Board had — well, the way it was set up — I 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



31 
asked you about the legislative intent of the Board. You quoted 
me a section that was not the one I was thinking of. I was 
i thinking of 1140.2, which says clearly: 

"It is hereby stated to be the 
policy of the State of California to 
encourage and protect the right of 
agricultural employees to full 
freedom of association, self- 
organization, and designation of 
representatives of their own 
choosing, to negotiate the terms and 
conditions of their employment, and 
to be free from the interference, 
restraint, or coercion of employers 
of labor, or their agents, in the 
designation of such representatives 
or in self-organization or in other 
concerted activities for the purpose 
of collective bargaining or other 
mutual aid or protection. For this 
purpose this part is adopted to 
provide for collective bargaining 
rights for agricultural employees." 
So, it's definitely slanted towards employees. And 
yet what is happening is, employees are not utilizing the ALRB 
Board, you know, for trying to resolve their issues. 

I mean, I represent an agricultural area; I know what 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



32 
lis happening there, because I meet with different — I meet with 

! 

jj growers and with farmworkers, trying to keep peace and harmony 

ll 
there in the fields. 

As you pointed out, you said you supported 60 percent 
of the cases that you were involved in were in the benefit of 
the workers, and the rest were either — they fell in other 
categories, but I know like the UFW, that's lost a lot of 
members, and they're not even hardly appealing, or they're not 
even bringing in complaints before the Board. They're using a 
boycott or other means. 

So, I mean, what's wrong? The intent of the 
Legislature was to set this up as a Board that would be there to 
resolve and protect both the workers and agriculture, and allow 
the process function. 

But what I see happening here is a deterioration of 
the Board, and I guess the Budget Committee just cut it. 

Senator Craven, the reason why they got five members, 
the Board, and I guess the Budget Committee now is cutting it 
down to three members, so either the workload is cut down, or it 
just seems like they're getting less involved. And at one time, 
they were really involved in a lot of labor. 

So, I just want to hear again your comments about 
what direction you think the Board is going, and if you think — 
and the reason I took the liberty of reading that section is, I 
think the Board is not operating collectively. I'm not saying 
you individually, but collectively they're not operating in the 
manner in which the Legislature put forth when they adopted the 



33 

1 

JALRB back in, I think, 1975 or '6. 

2 I; 

MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, I — I apologize, because 

3 

yesterday when we were chatting in your office, you had 



4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



mentioned about the preamble, so that's what I — what I read. 
I did not go any further. 

But yes, the argument or the statement that the Board 
has not been responsive to the — to the farmworkers, I have 
heard that statement for the over five years that I have been on 
the Board. 

I will share with the rest of the Committee those 
statistics that I shared with Senator Mello in his office 
yesterday afternoon. I — in the five years that I have been on 
the Board, I have participated in 93 Board decisions. This only 
half of the Board's workload. We have something also called 
Board orders. And in the time that I have been there, we have 
issued over 150 of those. 

And we don't always get credit for that. People 
seem to focus on the published decisions. 

Of those 93 decisions in which I participated in, 60 
percent of those favored the farmworkers and/or the union 
representing the farmworkers; 11 percent is what I call split 
decisions, maybe not — neither side got everything that they 
wanted; 16 percent, one-six, favored the employer; and 13 
percent is what I called miscellaneous, they were things such as 
the court had ordered, after reviewing our decision, the court 
had ordered us, the Board, to change a portion of our decision, 
so we had to reissue a new Board order. Or, they were decisions 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



34 
correcting clerical errors because we had left something out of 
the previous decision. And one of those was a remand to an 
administrative law judge seeking further information. 

I'm very proud of my record, and I feel that I have 
done the job that the law calls for in terms of administering 
that law to protect — to ensure the peace in the labor fields 
and to guarantee those collective bargaining rights for the 
workers. 

I have also heard the allegation that — that the 
Board is not being utilized. I did — I went back, looked at 
some of the figures. I have some figures to share with you. 

In the last five years that I have been there, close 

to 1500, or to be exact 1,481 unfair labor practice charges have 

been filed with the Board. As you well know, there's a 

distinction. There's two offices to the Board. There's the 

Office of the General Counsel, and there's the Office of the 

i 

Board. 

And under our statute, the General Counsel has the 
final authority in investigating charges and issuing a 
complaint. So, unless the charges go to complaint, there's not 
a possibility of that case coming before the Board. And that's 
by statute, and that's the right. 

But in any case, there has been close to 1500 unfair 
labor practice charges filed with the General Counsel's Office. 
A large percentage of those have been filed by the union, and a 
large number of those have been filed by the United Farmworkers. 

During those five years, also we have conducted 124 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



35 
elections. I have already said that we have issued 103 Board 
decisions, over 150 Board orders. We currently have 46 open 
compliance cases. 

I think that the Board is working, is doing its job. 
Yes, we have seen a drop in the unfair labor practice charges 
that have been filed with the Board. 

I went back and I looked at the number of charges 
that have been filed over the last 16 years. The average filed 
per year is 668. As of the last year that we had a record, we 
were up to 394. We had seen an increase of 54 percent in the 
unfair labor practice charges that had been filed in the 
previous two years. 

We have — we have to realize that the last few years 
has [sic] been hard on agriculture. And because it has been 
hard on agriculture, it has been hard on the farmworkers. We 
had the drought; we had the freeze, which reduced the number of 
acres that were available to raise crops. That created an 
overabundance of farmworkers. And in bad economic situations, 
everybody, not just in the agricultural fields, everybody wants 
to be able to keep their job. It makes it hard for the unions 
to come in and organize, and we have had a large number of what 
we call notice to take action filed by the unions. But once 
they come to the fields, it's hard for them to be able to get 
signatures, and you need at least 50 percent of the signatures 
of the people employed in order to petition for an election. 
So, it's been hard. 

We hope — 



1 

2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



36 

SENATOR MELLO: I read recently where there was 
these, you know, make whole remedies, and claims were filed, 
they go on and on and on. Some are about 15 years old, I guess. 

But recently, there was one settled, I think, in 
Imperial Valley. The claim was for $5-6 million, and it was 
settled for 100,000, or something like that. 

MS. RICHARDSON: I am not aware of a settlement that 
went down from five to 100,000. I don't have all the 
information. 

SENATOR MELLO: A couple hundred thousand, something 
like that. 

It seems like that they're making, you know, 
settlements to — and of course, these are money due the 
farmworkers . 

I just have one last point. I was reading out of — 

MS. RICHARDSON: I really wanted to share with you, 
on that subject, that in the last five years that I have been 
there, we have disbursed $6.4 million to 5,779 discriminatees. 

One of the frustrations that I have is that it does 
take time from the initial event to actually case come to us for 
the disbursement of the money. 

Under the Act, the final Board decisions can be 
appealed to higher courts. And we have a two-prong system. 
First we determine the liability that results in a final Board 
decision, and after all the appeal processes are exhausted, it 
comes back to us for — to determine the amount owed. 

That also results — could result in a final Board 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



37 
decision that can also appealed [sic] all the way to the 
California Supreme Court and to the U.S. Supreme Court. 

When all the processes have been exhausted, then 
we're ready to sit down and say, "Okay, this is the money that 
you owe." Interest is tacked on to that amount of money. 

Sometimes it's hard to collect the money. Sometimes 
the employers have gone into bankruptcy. In those situations, 
it's a judgment call in terms of saying we're going to go after 
everything there, but if there's not everything there to 
collect, we have to try to do the best to collect what we can. 

SENATOR MELLO: Let me ask you on a final point, and 
that is, in our folder here, from Mr. Michael Lyons, the 
President of the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Workers Local 78-B, 
he says, quote, that you have demonstrated by your association 
with a Mr. Scott Wilson of Fastiff and Tichy that your ethics on 
the Board are in question. And he says that you: 

"... informed Mr. Wilson ... two 
(2) weeks prior to a complaint being 
issued that the result would not be 
in favor of his client. It is well 
known that . . . Ramos Richardson has 
discussed the Bud Antle ..." 
company's, that in my — he headquartered in Salinas, my area: 

"Bud Antle . . . case with . . . Scott 
Wilson and Mr. Wilson's brother, ... 
Marty Wilson, who is on Governor 
Wilson's staff." 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



38 

MS. RICHARDSON: If I understand correctly, the 
letter alleges that I discussed a particular case with a Mr. 
Scott Wilson and a Marty Wilson? 

SENATOR MELLO: Yes, it's the last — 

MS. RICHARDSON: That is — that is not true. 

SENATOR MELLO: In other words, it's not a truth. 
It's the last item down there. 

MS. RICHARDSON: This is totally, totally false. I 
have never met with Mr. Scott Wilson. I have not discussed — 
because I have never met with Mr. Wilson, or I have not 
discussed this case with Mr. Wilson over the phone. 

I — this is not so. This is not so. 

SENATOR MELLO: Just part of a letter — Senator 
Beverly pulled it out; I have it in my folder here, too, from 
Mr. Lyons to Jack Henning. He's the Executive Treasurer of the 
AFL-CIO, where the same — same charges are being made. 

So you deny? 

MS. RICHARDSON: Yeah. I deny completely. 

Mr. Scott Wilson, the only thing I know about Mr. 
Scott Wilson is that he's an attorney. The only thing that I 
know about Mr. Scott Wilson is that he's an attorney that has 
represented clients before the Board, but I have never, and I am 
emphatic about this, I have never discussed any case with 
Mr. Wilson. I have never met personally with Mr. Wilson to 
discuss a case or anyone else. 

SENATOR MELLO: Okay, thank you. We'll just take it 
that you disagree with the statement made here. 



39 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 ,| 

8 

9 

10 

i! 

1 

11 i 

i 
12 

'i 

13 

I 
14 

15 

i| 
16 

I 

17 !; 

18 
,9 | 

20 

ji 

21 j 

22 

II 

23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



MS. RICHARDSON: Absolutely, absolutely. This is not 



true . 



SENATOR MELLO: Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you, Senator Mello. 

Is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposition? 
There appears to be none. 

Any Members of the Committee wish to make any 
statement? 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Are you ready for a motion? 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Yes. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Move we recommend confirmation. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Beverly moves. 

Call the roll, please. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 

Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 

Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

Senator Roberti. 

Four to zero. 



2 

3 ! 

4 

5 

I 

6 

i 

7 

8 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



40 

[Thereupon the final vote for 

confirmation was 5-0, as Senator 

Roberti's aye vote was added 

pursuant to Senate Rule 28.7] 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Very well, we move you to the Floor. 
MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you very much. I appreciate 



it. 



SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you. Nice to see you again. 

Let's take ten minutes. 

[Thereupon a brief recess was taken.] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: We're back in order. We will go to 
Otis Thurman, Warden, California State Prison at Lancaster. 

I try to give that the California pronunciation. I 
don't know how close I get. Do you know what I mean by that? 

MR. THURMAN: That's close enough. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Where I come from, they call that 
Lankester, and that's Pennsylvania. 

MR. THURMAN: Thank you, Senator Craven, the rest of 
the Senators, for allowing me to make my presentation. I'm also 
thanking the Senate Committee for my prior confirmation in 1986 
at the California Institution for Men. 

I'd like to begin by saying that I'm beginning my 
31st year with the Department of Corrections. I've worked all 
over the State of California in various capacities, beginning as 
a correctional officer in various classifications, parole agent, 
administrative and management positions for the last 20 years 
within the Department of Corrections. 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



41 
I served the last six years at the California 
Institution for Men. Some of the things I'd like to discuss in 
terms of my tenure as the Warden of the California Institution 

for Men, we effectively managed a severely overcrowded and aging 

jl 

facility with certain areas of the facility housed to a capacity 

i 

over 300 percent. We provided leadership in obtaining hospital 

licensure for CIM's 80-bed acute care hospital; developed a 

model operational housing and program facility for over 300 

ji 

;HIV-AIDS inmates; directed the design and construction of a new 

visiting processing center; worked in conjunction with Paroles 

and Community Services Division in developing and implementing a 

return to custody program. 

Under my direction, the CIM Reception Center 
processed a higher number of inmates on a monthly basis than 
most other state prisons process in a year, approximately 2500 
cases per month. 

During my six-year tenure as Warden of CIM, there 
were no major inmate disturbances with that high of 

overcrowding . 

II 

With the responsibility for institutional staffing of 
over 2,000 employees, we consistently met and exceeded all the 
affirmative action hiring mandates during my tenure as Warden at 
the California Institution for Men. 

Currently, and since August of '91, I was appointed 

as the Warden, acting, of the California State Prison at 
i 
Antelope Valley in Lancaster, where I've been currently working 

for the last year, working with the community and in trying to 



42 
1 

provide them information in terms of how our institution's going 

2 

to function in that committee. 
3 

Last week, I was appointed for — on a task group for 

4 

strategic planning for the next five years in the Lancaster 

5 

community, so I'm really pleased with the progress in working 

6 

with the Lancaster community 

7 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good, and thank you very much, 

8 jj 

Mr . Thurman . 

9 

Does anyone in the audience wish to speak in favor of 

10 

the appointment? One lady. Come forward, please. State your 
n 

name. 
12 

MS. MOLINA: My name is Bea Molina. I am the former 
13 

immediate past president of the Mexican-American Political 

14 

Association, as well as one of the founding members of the 

15 

Hispanic Law Enforcement Task Force, which represents seven of 

16 

the Hispanic law enforcement-related organizations. 

17 jj 

In front of you, you have a letter of endorsement 

18 ji 

from my organization, and I'm here to say that we have a lot of 

19 ' 

confidence in this individual, that he is willing to take the 

20 

kind of leadership that we need at this time to address the type 

21 

of issues that impact our community and the inmate population. 

22 

Saying that, you know, I'm here to answer any 

23 

questions, but we are fully supporting Mr. Thurman. 

24 r 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good. It's nice to have you 

25 

here again. You've been before us before, and I very well 

26 j; 

recall. 

27 

Does any Member of the Committee have any questions 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



43 
of this lady? There appears to be none. 

Thank you very much, dear. 

ii 

Yes, sir, you're next. 

MR. LANE: Good afternoon to the distinguished 
Committee Chairman and the rest of the Senators of this 
Committee. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you on behalf of us all. 
ij MR. LANE: I would like to take this opportunity to 

introduce myself. My name is Regis Lane. I'm currently a 
ijcorrectional counselor at Corcoran State Prison. 

First of all, I would like to say that this territory 

ij 

lis familiar to me. I was a Sergeant-at-arms here six years ago, 

I 

and it's always a good pleasure to come back. 

But more than that, I'm honored to be here on behalf 

il 

|of Otis Thurman. I am much — I am a union representative for 

Corcoran State Prison at the present time, during my tenure in 

the Department of Corrections, I've come to know Otis Thurman, 

both personally and professionally. He has provided great 

leadership for not only the Department and management, but also 

;in dealing with union members and union matters. He is 

exemplary as far as handling problems with issues and union 

ii 

issues, and we have never had any problem with Mr. Thurman as 
far as handling our issues in rank and file. 

So, I would like at this time to represent the 
Corcoran State Prison Local Chapter in endorsing and supporting 
Otis Thurman for your consideration of a confirmation as Warden 
for Lancaster. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



44 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Petris. 
SENATOR PETRIS: I want to talk about your job for a 



minute . 



MR. LANE: Okay. 

SENATOR PETRIS: It may have a bearing on your 
judgment in this direction. 

[ Laughter . ] 

SENATOR PETRIS: Correctional counselor counsels the 
inmates , I assume? 

MR. LANE: Yes, sir. 

SENATOR PETRIS: In what subjects? On how to get 
along in prison, or planning for the future when they get out? 
What subjects do you — 

MR. LANE: Actually, counselor is somewhat viewed as 
a misnomer. 

Basically we are case workers at this time because of 
the — the overcrowding at the present state in the prison 
system. 

We counsel inmates. Sometimes it's personal. 
They'll come in for personal counseling. A lot of times we'll 
refer them to the proper — to a psych. , or to a minister. More 
or less we counsel them on what they can do to obtain jobs, how 
to go about signing up for pre-parole classes. We do the 
classification work if they want a transfer, a hardship 
transfer. We put them up for classification and make the 
necessary recommendation for transfer to another institution. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Do you counsel them on the rules of 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



45 
the prison and how they should behave while they're in prison? 

MR. LANE: Yes, sir. When they come into the 
institution, we have a package that we give them, and we counsel 
them concerning their — their expected behavior at the 
institution. 

SENATOR PETRIS: When a person is up for parole, do 
you file a statement? Are you required to file a statement with 
respect to that application? 

MR. LANE: Yes, sir. What the counselors do, we have 
a caseload. And if a certain inmate on a caseload goes up to 
the Board, we submit a Board report to the Board of Prison 
Terms, making a recommendation concerning — 

SENATOR PETRIS: Either for or against? 

MR. LANE: For or against, yes, sir. 

SENATOR PETRIS: How's your batting average? 

MR. LANE: So far, none have been released. 

SENATOR PETRIS: None have been released — 

MR. LANE: No. 

SENATOR PETRIS: — that you have said, "Don't 
release them"? 

MR. LANE: Right. And most of the cases that I have 
had are, and most of the cases that come up before the Board, 
are murder cases. And that's — and most of the cases, I have 
recommended that they not be released at the present time. 

SENATOR PETRIS: So in your file, there's no 
recidivism problem. They don't come back because you won't let 
them out? 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



46 

MR. LANE: Not at all. 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR PETRIS: Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much. It's nice to 
have you back with us, if only for a brief time, but we're all 
very happy to see you doing so well in your career, and much 
success in the future. 

MR. LANE: Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Anyone else? Yes, sir. This is a 
fellow that all of us know, this is Leon Ralph. 

MR. RALPH: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Members. 

I am here representing the Association of Black 
Correctional Workers, professional workers throughout the prison 
system in California. I represent them as a consultant 
lobbyist. 

And I'm here in support of Mr. Thurman's nomination 
based upon the information that — and the support that he 
enjoys throughout that organization. He is truly an outstanding 
fellow. 

I have not met him before today, but I have read his 
record and have information that has come to me from the large 
membership within the Association of Black Correctional Workers. 
And it's all very supportive and all very positive. 

So, we would strongly urge that you vote for, 
approve, his reappointment to Warden. 

Thank you. I'm available for questions if you have 
any. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



47 

It's interesting to be on this side of the table, 
gentlemen. 

[ Laughter . ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I've got a question that deals with 
a bill I had up before Rules one time. 

[ Laughter . ] 

MR. RALPH: If I stay here too long, I might get a 
lot of those. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: All of us on this Committee have had 
the good fortune of serving with Leon, and I remember him very 
well since Nick, of course, is the senior, and Bob is next, then 
myself, and then Henry. But I can recall listening, looking up 
to him years ago, because he was kind of, you know, he carried a 
big stick around here. He was really quite the fellow, and time 
has not changed that at all. 

Nice to see you, Leon. 

MR. RALPH: Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Mr. Chairman, I've heard about old 
Assembly Rules Committee Chairmen going straight, but — 

[ Laughter . ] 

SENATOR BEVERLY: — none of them joined the clergy. 

Nice to see you. 

MR. RALPH: It's interesting, Senator Beverly, that 
you are now my Senator. I never knew that when I grew up, that 
you'd be my Senator. 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Oh, my. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



48 

MR. RALPH: What do we do now, right? 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Why don't you bless him before you 
leave . 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you, Leon, very much. 
, Yes, sir. 

MR. RICH: Thank you, Senators. My name is Ted Rich, 
and I represent Ted Rich. 

I am a product of those — those ten schools that 
rank below California that you were talking about earlier, and I 
happen to have grown up as a kid, though, where they pronounced 
Lancaster a little bit differently, having grown up around 
Chester, Pennsylvania. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: My gracious. I used to work there. 

MR. RICH: So, I know how they pronounce it. 

I'm here to strongly support the confirmation of 
Mr. Thurman. I do know him. I had the fortune of having him in 
the earlier stages — by the way, I've had 32 years in the 
criminal justice system myself — and Mr. Thurman, I had the 
pleasure of having this man work for me at one time, so I know 
his work ethics. 

I also know he embodies the total spirit of the 
things that we talk about that we would hope that serve as role 
models for people. This gentleman went to school, worked nights 
and went to school, and got his education, and got his degree, 
and furthered his career while in the process of raising a 
family. So, he has all of those qualifications that we — that 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



49 
we like to see in people, and we talk about that we would like 
— that we think embodies the American way of doing things. 

And he has a distinguished career in the criminal 
justice field, and I am happy to strongly recommend that you 
confirm him for the Warden's position. 

Thank you for your patience. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much for your 
appearance. My fellow Pennsylvanian, Senator Beverly, and I 
welcome a landsman. Do you know what a landsman is? Possibly 
not. I could ask Felice; she would know. That's a countryman. 
That's German or Yiddish, whichever way you want to look at it. 

All right, is there anyone who wishes or — well, I'd 
better stay straight on this one — is there anyone who wishes 
to speak in opposition to the appointment? There appears to be 
none . 

I was going to say does anyone have the audacity; 
everything was glowing up to this point. 

[ Laughter . ] 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Move we recommend confirmation. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Beverly moves. 

Call the roll, please, Pat. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



50 
Senator Petris. 
SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 
Senator Craven. 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 
Senator Roberti. 
Four to zero. 

[Thereupon the final vote for 

confirmation was 5-0, as Senator 

Roberti • s aye vote was added 

pursuant to Senate Rule 28.7] 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Confirmation to the Floor. 
Thank you very much. 

[Thereupon this portion of the 

Senate Rules Committee hearing 

was terminated at approximately 

4:08 P.M.] 

— ooOoo — 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 



14 
15 
16 

17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



51 
CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER 

I, EVELYN J. MIZAK, a Shorthand Reporter of 
the State of California, do hereby certify: 

That I am a disinterested person herein; 
that the foregoing Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
reported verbatim in shorthand by me, Evelyn Mizak, and 
thereafter transcribed into typewriting. 

I further certify that I am not of counsel 
or attorney for any of the parties to said hearing, nor in 
any way interested in the outcome of said hearing. 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my 

13 / 4? 

hand this ( day of August, 1992. 




EVELYN J. TCIZAK 
Shorthand Reporter 



207-R 

Additional copies of this publication may be purchased for $5.00 per copy 
plus current California sales tax. 

Senate Publications 

11 00 J Street, Room B-15 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Make checks payable to SENATE RULES COMMITTEE. 
Please include Senate Publication Number 207-R when ordering. 









5 



\w)n 






HEARING 

SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 




STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 113 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 

TUESDAY, AUGUST 11,1992 
2:05 P.M. 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

SEP 101992 

San t-KH.^iiMW 



208-R 



SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



4 




5 


i 


ft 




1 




H 




9 




10 




II 




12 




13 




14 




15 




10 




17 




IS 




V) 




» 




21 




22 




23 




24 




25 




26 


Reported by: 



HEARING 



STATE CAPITOL 
ROOM 113 
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



TUESDAY, AUGUST 11, 1992 
2:05 P.M. 



Evelyn J. Mizak 
2X Shorthand Reporter 



ii 



I 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 



APPEARANCES 
MEMBERS PRESENT 
SENATOR DAVID ROBERTI, Chair 
SENATOR WILLIAM CRAVEN, Vice Chair 
SENATOR NICHOLAS PETRIS 
SENATOR ROBERT BEVERLY 
SENATOR HENRY MELLO 

STAFF PRESENT 
CLIFF BERG, Executive Officer 
PAT WEBB, Committee Secretary 
RICK ROLLENS, Consultant on Bill Referrals 
NANCY MICHEL, Consultant on Governor's Appointments 

ALSO PRESENT 

MARZ GARCIA, Director 
Office of Administrative Law 

HARVEY ROSENFIELD, Chair 
Voter Revolt 

JOHN GARAMENDI, Commissioner 
Department of Insurance 






1 



111 
INDEX 

Ease 

Proceedings 1 

Governor's Appointees: 



MARZ GARCIA, Director 

Office of Administrative Law 1 

Summary of Previous Hearing 1 

Problems with Department of Insurance's 

Regulations 1 

Right of Insurers to Introduce Evidence 

that Rates May Be Confiscatory 2 

Governor's Overrule of OAL's 

Decision 2 

Department of Insurance's Lawsuit 

against OAL Dropped 2 

Qualifications to Serve as Director 2 

Statements by CHAIRMAN ROBERTI re: 

Stipulation that Qualifications and 

Reputation of Appointee are Outstanding 3 

Witnesses in Opposition: 

HARVEY ROSENFIELD, Chair 

Voter Revolt 3 

History of Sabotaging Implementation of 

Proposition 103 4 

OAL's Objections to Implementation 

Regulations 5 

Lack of Necessity 5 

Lack of Fair Hearing for Insurers 5 

Lack of Clarity in Regulations 6 

Motivation of Appointees for Blocking 

Implementation of Proposition 103 7 

Regulations are Confiscatory 7 



IV 



Recent Opinion of Federal Court Judge 8 

Not Political Controversy 8 

Reject Appointment 9 

Senate Should Eliminate OAL 9 

Questions by SENATOR CRAVEN re: 

Difference between This Nominee 

and Predecessors to Same Position 10 

Attempt to Usurp Commissioner's 

Authority 10 

Director's Obligation to Pass Judgment 

on Correctness of Regulations 10 

Compliance with Procedural 

Requirements of APA vs. 

Violation of Constitutional Rights 11 

Insupportable Findings of OAL 11 

Organization's Attorneys Opinions 

on OAL Decisions 11 

Legal Action Taken by Organization 12 

Representation in 65 Lawsuits 12 

Threat to Take Legal Action if 
Another Appointee Continues to 
Block Implementing Regulations 12 

JOHN GARAMENDI, Insurance Commissioner 
State Department of Insurance 

Eleven Months of Obstruction by OAL 

Submission to OAL Permanent Regulations 
which Extended Effectiveness of Emergency 
Regulations 14 

OAL's Disapproval of Permanent Regs 15 

Reason: Insurers Had not Had 

Sufficient Hearing Opportunities 15 

Director's Halt of All Efforts to 

Implement Proposition 103 15 



Director's Request that Department of 

Insurance Sue OAL 15 

Director's Power Is Restricted 16 

Cannot Analyze Constitutionality of 

Regulations 16 

Cannot Substitute Judgment 16 

With Veto of Both Emergency and Permanent 

Regs, Insurance Companies Can Argue in Court 

that There are No Regulations to Discuss 16 

Urge Rejection of Nomination 17 

Conclusion by MR. GARCIA 17 

Rejection of Regulations Due to Requirements 

of APA 17 

Charged with Making Sure Regs Are 

Consistent with Law 17 

Major Clarity Defect in Regs 17 






Department of Insurance Now Has Revenue 

to Sue 0A1 18 

Regulations Fail APA Standards 18 

Fail to Meet Cal Farm Requirement 

to Allow Insurers to Supply Evidence 

that Rates May Be Confiscatory 19 

Clarity Provision: Allows Commissioner 

to Change His Mind on Case-by-Case Basis 19 

Response by COMMISSIONER GARAMENDI 19 

Nominee Arguing that Each Case Should Be 

Handled Separately and Apart from All Others 20 

Impossible Task 20 

Generic Factors 20 

Issue of Public Interest 20 

OAL's Position if Ruse to Torpedo Regs 22 



VI 



1 

2 Questions by SENATOR PETRIS re: 

3 Funding for OAL in Budget Process 22 

4 Response by CHAIRMAN ROBERTI 22 

5 Response by MR. GARCIA 23 

6 Statements by SENATOR ROBERTI re: 

7 Desire to Vote for Appointment 23 

8 Proposition 103 Major Issue 23 

9 Director Should Err on Side of Public 23 

10 In Disputes of Legality, Director 

Should Err on Side of Elected Official 24 



■I i 

Need for Restraint on Part of Agency to Defer 

12 to Executive Power (Commissioner) 24 

13 Unable to Vote for Confirmation 24 

14 Statements by SENATOR BEVERLY re: 

15 Start with Presumption of Support for 

Governor 2 5 

16 

Added Presumption When Nominee is Former 
17 Colleague 25 

ik Stipulation that Appointee is Qualified 25 

19 Were Nominee's Actions Arbitrary 25 

2() Prior Testimony by MR. McNAMER Proved 

Appointee Did Not Act Arbitrarily 26 

21 

22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



Motion to Confirm 27 
Statements by SENATOR PETRIS re: 

Former Relationship with Appointee 27 

Clarity Argument 28 

Need to Protect Proposition 103 29 

Plan to Vote Against Confirmation 30 



Vll 



Statements by CHAIRMAN ROBERTI re: 

Difficulty of Director's Job 30 

Generic Application of Regs. vs. 

Case-by-Case Application 30 

Committee Action 31 

Termination of Proceedings 31 

Certificate of Reporter 32 



16 
17 
18 
19 

20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



■ 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

IS 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 
— ooOoo — 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: We now have before us a 
continuation of the hearing of a couple of months ago, the 
Governor's appointment of Mr. Marz Garcia, Director of the 
Office of Administrative Law. 

Senator Garcia is here. Please come forward. 

MR. GARCIA: Thank you, Senator Robert i. Good 
afternoon, Members. 

I was here a couple of months ago. Senator Craven 
wasn't here at the time. 

I think that the — there was a question about my 
being sent to the Floor of the Senate, and I think in large part 
— and this is for the benefit of Senator Craven; most of you 
are familiar with the dispute between OAL and the Department of 
Insurance — the Department of Insurance has some regulations 
that it feels are necessary to process rate approvals and also 
rebates. 

We have no problem with the regulations in general, 
except for two very important provisions, and one is a 
constitutional issue. There is a decision that the California 
courts call Cal Farm Insurance , which upheld Proposition 103; 
made a few minor changes in it. In that decision, they said 
that the Commissioner had the authority to go ahead and hold 
hearings and do whatever was necessary to process rate approvals 
and rebates, but it had to guarantee the rate applicants, 
meaning the insurance companies, an opportunity to introduce any 



2 
evidence that they felt was necessary to making their case, and 
| establishing that under the regulations that the rate might be 
confiscatory. 

The regulations deny the rate applicant — the rate 
applicant the ability to introduce that evidence, and for that 
reason they have not passed muster with OAL under the standards 
that we're mandated to follow. 

The Governor overruled our decision on the 
regulations, not disagreeing with the decision, with our 
decision or the legal merits of our case, but in order to get 
the issue before the courts. 

We thought we had them there until about a week or so 
ago, when we invited the Department of Insurance to sue OAL. 
They did do that. We thought that that would join the issue. 
The Department of Insurance never served us with the papers, and 
then dropped the lawsuit last week. 

In the meanwhile, a federal judge abstained from a 
case that would have dealt with this issue, but in doing so, 
took a look at the regulations and, in large part, agreed with 
OAL's position. 

So, we think that we are legally right on the merits. 
It's that political controversy that I think has jeopardized my 
confirmation and held me in this Committee. 

Otherwise, I think I am very well qualified to 
continue to serve as the Director of the Office of 
Administrative Law. I am a lawyer. I understand the government 
process. I have served in the Senate, in the Legislature, have 



3 
a reputation, and I think if you focus on the merits of my 

■I 

qualifications, I should be sent to the Floor of the Senate. 
And I think that in that case, I will be confirmed. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Thank you, Senator. 

Is there anyone here to speak on the issue of Marz 
Garcia' s qualifications? We will get to the point of the 
dispute over the implementation of Proposition 103 in a moment, 
but I want to make sure, either one way or the other. 

I think we can stipulate for the record, Senator, 
that your qualifications are outstanding, and your reputation is 
outstanding. 

However, Proposition 103 is an issue of enormous 
consequence, as you know, to the people of the State. And 
therefore, it is a matter that is part of the consideration on 
the confirmation. 

Is there anyone here in opposition to Marz Garcia 's 
confirmation as regards the implementation of Proposition 103? 
Mr. Rosenfield and Commissioner Garamendi. 

MR. ROSENFIELD: Mr. Chairman, good afternoon, 
Members of the Committee. 

My name is Harvey Rosenfield. I'm the Chair of Voter 
Revolt, the grassroots organization which sponsored Proposition 
103. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify here today. 

Mr. Chairman, the old cliche goes that we are a 
government of laws not men. But over the last three and a half 
years, the California consumers and taxpayers and voters have 



4 
witnessed a government of one woman, Roxani Gillespie, who, for 
two years, single-handedly sabotaged the implementation of 
Proposition 103 in a cooperative arrangement with the insurance 
industry from which she had come. 

The voters, foreseeing that that might be a 
possibility, provided in Proposition 103 for an elected 
Insurance Commissioner, who would implement the measure 
correctly, beginning in 1990, the 1990 election. 

Since that time, once again, the cliche government of 
laws not men has been proven wrong, this time by Mr. Marz 
Garcia, who has taken Roxani Gillespie's place as a friend of 
the insurance industry to implement the will of the industry 
rather than the will of the people. 

We're supposed to be a government of the people, by 
the people, and for the people. But when it comes to 
Proposition 103 for the last three and a half years, one way or 
another, the insurance industry has made this a government of 
the State Farms, for the All States, by the Aetnas, working 
through appointed, not elected, bureaucrats in the executive 
branch of the California government. 

The voters could not recall Roxani Gillespie. She 
was above the law for two years, and the voters could do nothing 
but join with Voter Revolt in lawsuits that we filed to force 
Gillespie to implement the law, at the same time to defend 103 
against Gillespie's efforts when she did act. 

Although we could do nothing about Roxani Gillespie, 
today the Senate Rules Committee can and must do something about 



5 
the present Director of the Office of Administrative Law. For 
over a year, Mr. Garcia has blocked critical regulations after 
intensive lobbying by the insurance industry. 

I would like to speak to some of the objections that 
Mr. Garcia has raised through his decisions to the 
implementation of Proposition 103, the effect of which has been 
to totally derail it most recently. 

His first — his first objection was that there was 
no necessity, quote, "no necessity" in Commissioner Garamendi's 
regulations to order $2.5 billion in rollbacks for the 
assessment of fees on insurance companies to cover the 
administrative costs of the Department of Insurance 
implementing Proposition 103 and the rollbacks. 

Proposition 103 itself, in black and white, states 
that the Department shall assess insurance companies fees to 
cover the cost of administrating the initiative. How they could 
say there's, quote, "no necessity", well, I leave that to you. 

Number two, Mr. Garcia and the OAL have argued — 
have ordered in blocking the rollback regulations that the 
insurers did not have an opportunity for a fair hearing on their 
arguments . 

This is a laughable, or would be a laughable, 
assertion if it weren't such a tragic misstatement of the last 
three and a half years. Insurers have had their day in court. 
In fact, by our count, they've had about 1,095 days in court, 
including hundreds of days of hearings in which the insurance 
companies hired lawyers at $500 an hour to file voluminous 



3 
4 
5 
ft 

7 
X 
9 
10 
II 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
IX 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
2ft 
27 
28 



briefs and expert testimony, all of which argued that 
Proposition 103 should never have passed. Every single nuance 
of Proposition 103 has been addressed in volumes of briefs in 
this — in this lawyer extravaganza mounted by the insurance 
industry . 

They are still trying, three years later, to — to 
re-argue the results of the 1988 election with thousands of 
pages of frivolous testimony that would fill the entire space in 
this room. 

To suggest that the insurance companies have not had 
a fair hearing is yet another insult added to injury to the 
people of this state, who have watched apparently government 
unable to act, paralyzed — paralyzed by lawyers for the 
insurance industry. 

A third assertion by the OAL and Mr. Garcia as an 
excuse for blocking the rollback regulations is that the 
regulations lacked, quote, "clarity". The reality is that these 
regulations are very specific and detailed. They — they 
utilized the preceding two years of testimony under Insurance 
Commissioner Gillespie, and then another eight months of new 
hearings and testimony conducted by the elected Insurance 
Commissioner, Mr. Garamendi. 

The insurance industry knows exactly what these 
regulations mean. That's why they have hired lobbying firms to 
hammer the OAL, lobby the OAL, and convince the OAL to undermine 
these regulations. There's nothing unclear about these 
regulations. The insurance companies don't want to turn over 



7 
$2.5 billion rollbacks to the consumers and voters of this 
state. And so, they have sought and found a friend in state 
government willing to block that amount of money. 

I can tell you what Mr. Garcia' s motivation is in 
blocking these regulations. It has nothing to do with clarity, 
necessity, or the opportunity of insurers to have a fair 
hearing. 

His motivation was revealed in a speech made to an 
insurance agents audience in June, when he said that the reason 
why — and if you'd like to see it, I have a copy of the news 
clip from it — he vetoed the regs because they were, quote, 
"confiscatory". That is the legal term, the legal basis, for 
the entire insurance industry argument against Prop. 103 's 
rollbacks, that they will deprive the insurance companies of a 
profit. The companies can't give a profit and still operate in 
this state. 

That conclusion — that conclusion is the entire 
point of these regulations, but Mr. Garcia has decided to 
appoint himself as the judge to second-guess the Insurance 
Commissioner that the voters said would decide that issue. 
Mr. Garcia was appointed to the office of Director of OAL. He 
was not appointed to the Superior Court or Supreme Court. His 
opinion on whether these regulations violate the constitutional 
rights of the insurance companies is irrelevant. It's none of 
his business whether they do or they don't. 

Now, I want to here mention two points that Mr. 
Garcia just said. He said that a federal court judge agreed 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 



,ft I 



17 
IX 
19 

20 
21 

22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



6 
briefs and expert testimony, all of which argued that 
Proposition 103 should never have passed. Every single nuance 
of Proposition 103 has been addressed in volumes of briefs in 
this — in this lawyer extravaganza mounted by the insurance 
industry . 

They are still trying, three years later, to — to 

I: 

ire-argue the results of the 1988 election with thousands of 

ii 

jpages of frivolous testimony that would fill the entire space in 

this room. 

To suggest that the insurance companies have not had 
a fair hearing is yet another insult added to injury to the 
people of this state, who have watched apparently government 
unable to act, paralyzed — paralyzed by lawyers for the 
insurance industry. 

A third assertion by the OAL and Mr. Garcia as an 
excuse for blocking the rollback regulations is that the 
regulations lacked, quote, "clarity". The reality is that these 
regulations are very specific and detailed. They — they 
utilized the preceding two years of testimony under Insurance 
Commissioner Gillespie, and then another eight months of new 
hearings and testimony conducted by the elected Insurance 
Commissioner, Mr. Garamendi. 

The insurance industry knows exactly what these 
regulations mean. That's why they have hired lobbying firms to 
hammer the OAL, lobby the OAL, and convince the OAL to undermine 
these regulations. There's nothing unclear about these 
regulations. The insurance companies don't want to turn over 



* 

3 

4 
S 
6 



9 
of the Insurance Commissioner, who the voters said would 
implement the initiative. 

I don't think Mr. Garcia is going to mind when you 
vote to reject his appointment. I'm told that he hasn't even 
been in his office for the last two months. 

Today, the Senate should reject Mr. Garcia, this 
appointment that never should have been made, and then, as 
Senator Roberti suggested in the last hearing on this matter, 
the Senate should go on and eliminate the Office of 
Administrative Law, not just its funding, but its authority. In 
the midst of the state's budget crisis, the taxpayers cannot 
afford a Dan Quayle-style shadow government operating in our 
state government, whose mission it is to carry out the will of 
the special interests. 

I respectfully, therefore, urge on behalf of Voter 
Revolt and its 300,000 members in cities throughout this state, 
that Mr. Garcia 's appointment be rejected. 

I thank you very much for your willingness to hear 
our testimony. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Thank you, Mr. Rosenfield. 

Any questions? 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Yes. 

You confused me a little bit in some of the things 
you said. I have a little trouble following it, and 
unfortunately, I was not present at the original hearing. 

But you made mention in a rather derogatory sense of 
Mr. Garcia' s direction of the Office of Administrative Law. And 



10 

I 

you said that he should not — you gave us all the 

2 

proscriptions, but what did he do that was any different than 

any of his predecessors in that particular job do? What made 

4 

ijhis tenure so abysmal, other than the fact that he didn't agree 

with you? 

6 

i 

MR. ROSENFIELD: Senator, it's not that he did not 

7 

agree with us, with me, or with Voter Revolt. 
8 

9 



10 

II 
12 
13 

14 
IS 
16 

17 
IS 
I*) 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
2X 



He attempted to insert his own viewpoint and that of 

the insurance companies into a matter that is strictly a 

question of the Commissioner's authority. His — the orders 

that Mr. Garcia issued, which effectively have blocked the 

rollback regulations a number of times in the past, did not, 

number one, comply with Proposition 103; number two, they 

exceeded the authority of his office. And by doing so, he has 

effectively and single-handedly prevented a process that — that 

;is very straight- forward and simple, and everybody understands 

it, from going forward; a process that should have been 

jcompleted when Roxani Gillespie was still the Insurance 

Commissioner. 
ii 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Is the Director of the Office of 

Administrative Law, is he not, or that person, in a position to 

pass judgment on the correctness of something as it relates to 

existing law? 

MR. ROSENFIELD: It is our view and the view of our 

^attorneys that Mr. Garcia 's role, the Director — the role of 

ij 

the Director of the Office of Administrative Law is confined to 
determine whether the regulations issued by the Department of 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



11 

Insurance comply with procedural requirements of the 
Administrative Procedures Act. 

It is absolutely clear that it is not his position to 
determine whether the regulations issued by the Department of 
Insurance violate the constitutional rights of insurance 
companies. 

In the areas in which OAL has purported in its 
decisions on the rollback regulations to examine procedural 
compliance, they have — the results are insupportable. For 
example, I mentioned that point about no necessity to assess 
fees on the insurance carriers, when in fact 103 specifically 
provided that safeguard for the taxpayers. 

Or, for example, the argument that they were deprived 
of their right to — the insurance carriers were deprived of 
their right to present their case, which borders on a due 
process constitutional argument. But giving the Director the 
benefit of the doubt, it's an insupportable finding. If 
anything has — if anything, the history of 103, and the thing 
that angers the voters so much, is that it has been manipulated 
through administrative activity, and complaints, and 
interventions by insurance companies. They have had their day 
in court. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Your attorneys are representing your 
organization, presumably are unified within the thought that 
there's much that is not correct as it relates to decisions made 
by OAL? 

MR. ROSENFIELD: Yes, Senator. 



12 

And by the way, I should say that I'm sorry you 
weren't in the last hearing. I could provide you with the 
extensive, you know, briefs that we have submitted. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: No, that's not really necessary. I 
appreciate your saying so. 

What I was going to ask you in a very layman- like way 
is, when you feel there has been such an egregious error on the 
part of an individual, and that person has at least for a while 
prevailed, what legal action have your attorneys taken? Do they 
due? 

MR. ROSENFIELD: Senator, we are — our attorneys are 
representing Voter Revolt in approximately 65 lawsuits — not 
all of them, but as many of them as we can — brought by 
insurance carriers against Proposition 103. 

It is — it was our judgment that we would ultimately 
have to go to court unless this situation was resolved, 
hopefully by the elimination of what has become a generic 
stumbling block in state government to the Department of 
Insurance's effort to implement 103. 

I can assure you that if for some reason OAL 
continues, and for some reason the Governor appoints yet another 
person who seems determined to interfere with 103, we will 
certainly go to court to block that kind of involvement, and we 
will win. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: You say that in a sort prospective 
approach: if they do this and that. 

I understand you initially to say they have done 



2 

3 

4 

3 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



13 
that. 

MR. ROSENFIELD: No, I did not. Our lawyers have not 
sued to block. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Oh, no, no. They have created a 
problem. 

MR. ROSENFIELD: Yes, you mean the Office of 
Administrative Law? 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Yes. 

MR. ROSENFIELD: Oh, it's a nightmare, but the 
solution presented for — the opportunity for you today is to 
take all the corrective action that is necessary: remove this 
individual from his office, and eliminate in the next few weeks 
from the statutes of California the authority of this agency to 
meddle in the affairs of the implementation of 103. 

If that does not happen, and the next person there 
continues this course of conduct, then we will take that action. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Well, I appreciate your explanation. 
I thank you very much. 

MR. ROSENFIELD: Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Thank you, Senator Craven. 

Is there anyone else here? Commissioner Garamendi. 

COMMISSIONER GARAMENDI: Mr. Chairman and Members of 
the Senate, Mr. Garcia, I appreciate the opportunity to once 
again appear before you and ask you to reject the nomination of 
Mr. Garcia to serve as the Director of the Office of 
Administrative Law. The second time that I've been here. 

Since the June hearing, the record of Mr. Garcia and 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



14 
his resistance to the will of the people has grown. It has not 
lessened at all. 

Last June, I documented before this Committee the ten 
months of delay that Mr. Garcia has caused through is decisions. 
In the packet that I just handed you there is an updated version 
of that document. It has now gone to eleven months of 
obstruction. You'll note the cross-out and the underlines as we 
updated this. 

Since June, two months have indeed passed, and we've 
suffered at least one additional — one and a half months of 
additional delay in getting the consumers their refunds. 
Following the June 8th rejection of my request to simply 
maintain the status quo — I requested this of the Office of 
Administrative Law — and thereby advance the judicial review by 
asking them to renew the emergency regulations that were 
reinstated by Governor Wilson, I submitted to the Office of 
Administrative Law for approval the permanent regulations that, 
by action of law, extended for 30 days the effectiveness of the 
emergency regs, which Mr. Garcia had disapproved. 

That additional one month period of time, that 30 
days, enabled us to advance the ongoing hearings on the rollback 
obligations for State Farm and Geico. It also enabled us to 
secure another voluntary rollback from Progressive Insurance 
Company, adding an additional $51.2 million to the rebate checks 
in the mail to California policyholders. These regulations have 
thus far resulted in nearly $300 million of rebates. 

Unfortunately, on July 15th, Mr. Garcia again pulled 



15 
the plug on the successful, ongoing process of getting the 
rebates done. He disapproved the permanent regulations that we 
had earlier submitted. He repeated the same preposterous claim 
that he had made previously; namely, that the insurance 
companies had not had enough opportunities for hearing. 

Now, never mind that there are 50,000 pages of 
comments on the regulations themselves from the insurance 
companies; 50,000 pages. Never mind that there were months of 
hearings on the authorized rate of return and the other generic 
determinations. And never mind that each insurer had the 
opportunity to go for hearings under those regulations. 

So far, there were at least two — two weeks of 
hearings that had occurred. I suppose that was just not enough 
hearings for Mr. Garcia; not enough public comment. 

Also, never mind that the insurers' legal arguments 
on the point which Mr. Garcia had embraced are presently before 
the courts, where they will receive a full and fair hearing. 

In the meantime, while the lawyers write their 
briefs, while the court studies them, Mr. Garcia says that all 
other efforts to implement Proposition 103 must come to a halt, 
and he has effectively done just that. He has halted the 
negotiations and the rebate process, and he and the 
administration stand fully in the public light as being 
responsible for the derailment of the rebates. 

Now, Mr. Garcia said earlier, as he has said before, 
sue me. I don't understand what benefit the taxpayers of the 
State of California have in seeing two state agencies sue each 



16 
other when, in fact, the case is already before a court, as it 
is in the Twentieth Century case. We therefore declined to 
carry out the suit that we had originally intended to bring. 

There is clear evidence on the record of the last 
twelve months that Mr. Garcia is intent upon derailing 103, and 
that he is using extra legal proceedings and power not given to 
him to accomplish that. 

His power is restricted. He does not have the power 
of analyzing the constitutionality of our regulations, but 
rather a much narrower power. He cannot substitute his judgment 
for mine. A court must determine whether my judgment on the 
regulations is correct or not, and that is before the court. 

Unfortunately, the court proceeding itself is 
jeopardized by Mr. Garcia' s action, wherein he denied both the 
emergency regs and the permanent regs, giving the insurance 
companies the opportunity, as they have already taken, to go to 
court and say the whole thing is moot, and everything ought to 
be thrown out because there are no regulations to discuss in the 
first place. 

We have successfully thwarted that attempt in the 
courtroom thus are, and hopefully we'll be able to prevail. 

Perhaps the end game move that Mr. Garcia has in mind 
is to simply force us into a court setting and then remove our 
ability to even argue the case before the court. I hope that 
doesn't happen. We'll fight vigorously to prevent that from 
happening, but it might. That would result in 103 being totally 
derailed. 



him. 



17 
I think there is ample reason. I urge you to reject 

I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might 



have. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Thank you, Commissioner. 

Any questions? 

Any further opposition? 

Mr. Garcia, you can conclude. 

MR. GARCIA: Yeah, I just would like to clarify a 
couple of things. 

The reason that OAL rejected the regulations is that 
because we follow the law that was created by the Legislature in 
the Administrative Procedure Act. Procedurally, the regulations 
are fine. 

They fail a couple of standards under the 
Administrative Procedure Act. One of the things that we're 
charged with doing is making sure that the regulations are 
consistent with the law, including case law and appellate court 
decisions specifically. That's our major reason for saying that 
these regulations are unconstitutional. We are charged with 
making sure that the regulations are legal. 

And then there is a major clarity defect. Where the 
situation is now is, we have — they don't have permanent 
regulations, at least on what's necessary to hold the hearings, 
and they may not even been necessary to hold the hearings. They 
could probably without regulations, although I think regulations 
are a good idea. 



19 
as applied to that specific insurer. 

Right now, the regulations are in a fashion that you 
can only supply certain information that the Department of 
Insurance wants. You can't introduce anything outside of that. 

Cal Farm says they're entitled to introduce anything 
they want so it can go into the record, and if they want to 
appeal the decision of the Department of Insurance, they can go 
into court and get a decision on it. 

The other provision is a clarity provision. It says 
that the — in effect says that the Commissioner of Insurance 
can change his mind after he takes into account the fact that 
insurance is in view of the public interest and is sometimes 
mandatory. 

That means that on a case-by-case basis, he can 
change his mind. No one knows what the standards are or why 
it's being changed. And that — when you write a regulation, it 
has to be clear to those people that are going to be affected by 
it. The comments in the file are voluminous; no one understands 
what that means, what the standards are. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Any further testimony? Yes, 
Commissioner. 

COMMISSIONER GARAMENDI : I would like the Members of 
this Committee to understand the import of the two issues that 
were raised by Mr. Garcia a moment ago. 

The first issue is far more than just whether the 
insurance companies have the opportunity to introduce whatever 
testimony and information they may want to in the hearing. 



18 

The regulations are fine with two major defects. 
They did clarify the fee defect, and that — when they 
originally sent the regulations to us, they imposed fees on the 
insurers, and they had to put a statement in there that 
explained the necessity of those fees, and provide substantial 
evidence that backed up the necessity of those fees. That was 
one of the grounds of rejection of the original regulations. 

When they sent us back — when they sent them back to 
us, they severed that provision; provided us with a necessity 
statement, and we gave — we said, okay, now it's fine. You 
have fees, to go ahead and proceed. They now have revenue to 
sue OAL. Maybe Voter Revolt doesn't, but they certainly do. 

They dropped the case against us. Again, we asked 
them to do this. 

The situation is now that they don't have these 
regulations because the failed the APA standards. They have 
made an appeal to the Governor. We have told the Governor they 
still fail the standards, and if they'd just clear these two 
defects, and specifically said how that that could be done, they 
can have the regulations. 

The ball is really in the Department of Insurance's 
court. They can have the regulations if they just clear two 
defects up, and that's relatively simple. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Where are the two defects again? 

MR. GARCIA: One is the violation of the Cal Farm 
decision which prohibits the insurance rate applicant from 
providing evidence at to whether or not the rate is confiscatory 



20 

Essentially, Mr. Garcia is arguing that each and 
every case be handled separate and apart from all others, and 
that there be no commonality in the decisions that we make on 
rollbacks. And that each insurance company must be taken on an 
individual case basis. In other words, there is nothing generic 
in this industry. 

I must tell you that Roxani Gillespie attempted to 
do that and found it to be an absolutely impossible task that 
would result in thousands of individual hearings, and ultimately 
she failed at that concept of individualized hearings. 

She then moved to generic determinations, which is 
what these regulations do, and actually we followed her 
procedures in setting the generic factors, in that there is a 
commonality in certain parts of the formula and certain parts of 
the insurance industry operations. 

Without that commonality, we then have — without it, 
we have an impossible task of trying to regulate, because there 
would be an inability to provide equality and equity between the 
various companies. If each one were totally unique, which they 
are not, there could be equity, and we would then be on the 
horns of that dilemma and be brought before the court for being 
— for handling cases in an inequitable way, or the companies 
inequitably. 

The second point has to do with this issue of the 
public interest. I refer you to page three of my letter in 
which we pick up this point. 

"Mr. Garcia objects to two sections 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



21 



of the regulations stating that, in 
reviewing rates, the Commissioner 
shall not merely consider the 
insurance company's claimed needs 
but shall also 'consider the fact 
that insurance is imbued with the 
public interest and is sometimes 
legally required.'" 
Well, indeed, that is the case. 

"The propriety of that policy is so 
self-evident, one might have 
difficulty even imagining OAL's 
objection. OAL claims the phrase 
lacks 'clarity' [and] that the 
regulated entities cannot understand 
what it means. 

"In fact , the problem is that 
the insurers understand [exactly] 
what it means ... and don't like it. 
In the rule making process, they 
urged that only an insurer's cost of 
capital and other costs be weighed, 
[and] there is no place in the 
constitutional equation for consumer 
interests. That is a view that the 
insurance companies have previously 
urged, but it was rejected by the 



22 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

X 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

IS 

l(> 

17 

IK 

19 

20 

21 
->-> 

23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



Supreme Court. The language of the 

regulation merely reflects the fact 

that I have considered and rejected 

the insurers' one-sided approach to 

rate regulation. Every company 

involved in rate regulation in the 

United States fully understands 
ii 

• • • • 

the balance that's necessary in setting rates. 

Mr. Garcia would have me only consider one side, that 
is the company's side. We think that's wrong. 

We think you clearly understand that it is simply a 
ruse put forward to torpedo the regulatory process and to stop 
the rebates from going forward. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Any further testimony on the 
matter? Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: I had a question. 

In the budget debate Sunday, it was reported, at 
least in that version of the budget, that the funding for the 
Office is eliminated. 

Now, that hasn't passed, but I'm wondering if you 
could shed any light on that? 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: It's sometimes part of the budget 
negotiation, sometimes not. 

My last meeting with the Governor sort of indicated 
that he was rather adamant that we maintain the funding for the 
agency. 



] 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



23 

MR. GARCIA: Mr. Chairman, could I say something on 
that? 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Please. 

MR. GARCIA: I think I can tell you that it's an 
economic mistake to not fund OAL. And the simple hard numbers 
are, right now, the only source of regulations is a private 
publisher. 

We made some arrangements with both Teale and the 
State Printer to get the OAL back into printing the regulations 
and distributing them, making them available to state and local 
government. And the savings from that alone more than offsets 
the budget of OAL. 

So, there's no economic merit to not funding OAL. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: On the matter of the confirmation, 
when I heard of your appointment, I wanted to vote for it. I 
still would like to vote for it. 

However, Proposition 103 is, as you know and as I 
indicated earlier, is a major issue. I think the public looks 
to us as to how we're going to implement their will. 

I would say that on an issue such as this, in my 
opinion, a Director of one of the departments should err on the 
side of the public if there is a dispute as to legal 
interpretation. In this case, the public voted for Proposition 
103. 

And then secondly, there is an executive officer in 
this case, and that's the Insurance Commissioner. And if there 
is a dispute as to the legality, I would say that if there's 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



24 
going to be an error, presuming that both sides are equal — I'm 
not saying that — that there should an attempt on the part of 
the bureaucracy to err on the side of the elected official. We 
would expect that of gubernatorial appointments when they enter 
the Governor. We seem to have bifurcated situation here, and 
that is that the Governor has appointed one head of the 
department, but the people have elected somebody who doesn't 
necessarily share his philosophy at the other agency. 

But in this case, Commissioner Garamendi is the 
executive officer, not Governor Wilson. And I think that he has 
the charge of implementing Proposition 103. Compounded by the 
fact that Proposition 103 is an initiative, both those factors, 
I would think that both we and the bureaucracy should err on the 
side of implementation, assuming that the legal weight is equal. 

You make a compelling argument, but I have to say 
that I'm a little bit more impressed by the argument that 
Mr. Rosenfield and Mr. Garamendi have made. 

Restraint on the part of the agency to defer to the 
executive power is, I think, something we look to, and I think 
in this one very, very important issue, that restraint wasn't 
present. 

For that, I can't vote for your confirmation, and I 
say it regrettably, because I have high regard for your work as 
a Senator and high regard for you. But this is an enormously 
important issue. 

Does anybody else wish to say something? 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Mr. Chairman, I was prepared to 



25 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

l J ) 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



make a motion that we approve the nomination. 

In all of these hearings of Governor appointees, I 
guess, as a Republican I start with the presumption that I 
support the Governor, and I listen, and I can have that 
presumption removed. It has been removed on occasion, although 
III don't think we've ever had to go to a vote. I think they've 
withdrawn the nominations, or the nominee has withdrawn himself. 

So, I start with that presumption. Also, as a 

.brother, a former colleague in the Senate, that's an added 

ij 

jj presumption, I suppose, for most of us. It is for me; I admit 

it. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: It's human nature for me as well. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: True. 

So after that, I thought this. It's come down to one 
issue: his behavior, his actions with reference to Prop. 103 
and the Insurance Commissioner's regulations. 

We stipulated that he's qualified for the job. He 
must have acted on hundreds if not thousands of other 
applications for approval of administrative regulations or 
filings. Nobody has complained about any of them, not a one, 
it's just in this one set, one series. 

So, I thought to myself, did he act illegally? I 
think not. 

Did he act out of some evil motive to stick it to the 
insurance companies, or to save the insurance companies, to 
protect them? Did he act arbitrarily? 

On the latter, I had some concern. We overlooked 



26 

1 | 

!| today, and there's been no reference to it, there was testimony 

2 1 

at the prior hearing — I wish I had the notes about it — but 
3 

there was testimony at the prior hearing by Chief Counsel for 

4 

the — for your department, or one of the attorneys. 



5 

6 

7 

X 

9 
10 
II 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
IX 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 

24 | 
25 

26 | 
27 
2X 



MR. GARCIA: Mr. McNamer, who is here today. He 
talked about some of the technical reasons. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: A veteran member of the legal staff 
of that office. And it proved to me that Mr. Garcia did not act 
arbitrarily or out of any evil motive. 

The man, right or wrong — and incidentally, Garcia 
could be wrong, and I wouldn't say that's a reason for 
disapproving his appointment — but right or wrong, this lawyer 
impressed me as one who had given it a lot of careful study and 
thought, and had compelling reasons, and he recommended to 
Senator Garcia that he reject the regulations. 

So, I was satisfied that he did not act arbitrarily 
or out of any evil motive. 

I've always regarded Senator Garcia as very 
independent, somewhat of a character, but then so was 
Commissioner Garamendi, who was a character and independent. 
And I respect those virtues, at least one of them. 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR BEVERLY: So, based on that, I'm prepared — 
not the one individual. The one characteristic. 

[ Laughter . ] 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I respect them both. John knows 
that. 



27 

So I'm prepared to move this Committee act to 
recommend the nomination. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Thank you. There's a motion 
before us. 

Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: We're going through some anguish 
here. One of the toughest parts of being a Senator, or any 
elected official, is to be able to look at friend in the eye on 
an issue and say no. 

I met with Senator Garcia earlier in the year on 
other matters. We had pretty general agreement. In fact, I had 
indicated I'd even carry legislation if it was needed to make 
sure that the regulators comply with the statute. I've had 
trouble with that all through the years on some of my 
legislation. 

You have sometimes what I call administrative 
subversion. You fight very hard for two, or three, or four 
years to get a law adopted, and some of the toughest opponents 
are the administrators in the executive branch who doesn't like 
that law. Then they are given the duty of administering that 
law, and instead of doing that, they undermine it. I've faced 
that several times. I think we all have. And when we had our 
conversation in which you pointed out that you felt some of 
those regulators were going pretty far from the statute, 
remembering my prior experience, I said, "Well, if I can help 
bring the into line, make sure they're focused, make the 
language understandable , " that ' s what Speaker McCarthy kept 



I 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



28 
emphasizing when he carried legislation, that we don't even 
understand the language, let alone ask ourselves does it carry 
out the purpose of the statute or not. 

I think the arguments made on at least two of the 
points, one is lacking clarity, you know what the saying is: 
you need a Philadelphia lawyer to read an insurance policy, and 
only those lawyers understand it. And I'm sure they understand 
the language of these regulations that the Commissioner has 
adopted . 

And the other — let's see, there were three 
arguments. One of the others was on a point that has escaped me 
at this very dramatic moment. 

At any rate, I think both of those arguments are very 
compelling. 

And it is very painful, because I, too, am reluctant 
to vote against a good friend and a colleague from way back. We 
worked together on things in the past, and in fact since Senator 
Garcia left the Senate, we've worked on other things. 

I kind of endorse what Senator Robert i has said, we 
have to come back to the fundamentals of 103. 

It's strange the reaction. We all pick and choose 
our issues and when we want to raise the banner in defense of 
the people. 

If this had been a Prop. 13 situation, you wouldn't 
have got past that first ruling, right or wrong. If that first 
ruling had been interpreted as blocking the intent of the 
people, there 'd have been a revolution all over again. Jarvis 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



29 
probably would have made a comeback, and he's been gone for 
years . 

A feeling is just as strong out there, but it hasn't 
been focused as much as it is on Prop. 13. I know the moment we 
even begin discussion, informally, at some hearing that we 
better revisit 13, there's some flaws in it, we get bombarded 
with well-orchestrated efforts outside, in the mail, and 
otherwise, telling us we'd better dare not lay a hand on that 
because it's the will of the people. 

Well, the people can make mistakes, too, and they 
have, as we have. 

We don't seem to have that same sense of sanctity 
about the people's vote on 103 because of the overwhelming power 
and economic power, especially, that opponents have, and can 
file all these lawsuits, and just keep on hammering away. 
That's awesome, on top of the millions and millions that were 
spent in the campaign. 

I think Mr. Rosenfield makes a very good case on 
that, plus all these lawsuits that have been filed in between. 
Now, they're entitled to those lawsuits. I wouldn't deny them 
the right to do it, but it does raise a question of what is 
their motive and why are they doing this? Well, they want to 
get rid of the statute. And I don't blame them for urging on us 
that those regulations are not in compliance with this and that. 

But it seems to me, from what he has told us and what 
we heard before, that it's pretty clear. 

So, I am going to vote the same way as Roberti with a 



I 

2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



30 
great deal of reluctance because of our past relationship and my 
own admiration and respect for you. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Thank you, Senator. 

I'd like to interject a point on this issue that 
Commissioner Garamendi stated that rather impresses me as to the 
difficulty of his job, and the Catch 22 position that the 
insurance companies want to put the Commissioner. 

Unfortunately, your Office has been wound up in, not 
intentionally — you're forced; you have to deal with these 
questions when they're presented to you — and that's the whole 
question on the generic application to insurance companies. 

I mean, to deal with every insurance company on rate 
regulation on an individual basis is impossible, not only 
costly but impossible, because the amount of time, and the 
inability to make it equal as to everybody, we would be here in 
the 21st Century discussing this. 

And the insurance companies have the battery of 
attorneys that would make the Trial Attorneys Association pale 
into insignificance by comparison, to use those arguments to 
stall us into the 21st Century, quite literally, because they 
want each company to be dealt with individually. 

As soon as the Commissioner would say, "Uncle, we're 
going to go with you individually rather than generically, " the 
same battery of attorneys would push us into the 21st Century 
saying that they aren't dealt with equally, and come up with 
some rare permutations of regulation that one company isn't 
dealt with the same. And it's inevitable when you have so many 



31 
companies and so much complexity. 

It's just an impossible situation. I could see a 
scenario where the regulations never would be implemented 
without some understanding from the OAL. 

Well, at any rate, your job, too, has been difficult. 
And I'm not quarreling at all with your motivation in the 
decisions that you made. It's just that I don't agree with 
them. 

Senator Beverly's motion is before us. Secretary 
will call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: No. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello No. 

Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: No. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris No. 

Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

Senator Roberti. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: No. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Roberti No. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: The motion fails two to three. 

MR. GARCIA: Thank you, Members. 

[Thereupon this portion of the 
Senate Rules Committee hearing 
was terminated at approximately 

i 

^ ? na p. m. 1 



32 



I 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 



CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER 



I, EVELYN J. MIZAK, a Shorthand Reporter of 
the State of California, do hereby certify: 

That I am a disinterested person herein; 
that the foregoing Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
reported verbatim in shorthand by me, Evelyn Mizak, and 
thereafter transcribed into typewriting. 

I further certify that I am not of counsel 
or attorney for any of the parties to said hearing, nor in 
any way interested in the outcome of said hearing. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my 



hand thi 



is /s* ~ 



day of August, 1992. 



^J^EVELYN' J.^MIZJ 

Shorthand Reporter 



208-R 

Additional copies of this publication may be purchased for $5.00 per copy 
plus current California sales tax. 

Senate Publications 

11 00 J Street, Room B- 15 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Make checks payable to SENATE RULES COMMITTEE. 
Please include Senate Publication Number 208-R when ordering. 






X 



'* 



HEARING 

SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 



STATE OF CALIFORNIA 




STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 113 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 12, 1992 
2:10 P.M. 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
SEP 10*92 

SAN t-KAi*«*H**»f 



209-R 






1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



HEARING 



STATE CAPITOL 
ROOM 113 
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 12, 1992 
2:10 P.M. 



Reported by: 



Evelyn J. Mizak 
Shorthand Reporter 



11 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



APPEARANCES 

MEMBERS PRESENT 

SENATOR DAVID ROBERTI, Chair 

SENATOR WILLIAM CRAVEN, Vice Chair 

SENATOR NICHOLAS PETRIS 

SENATOR ROBERT BEVERLY 

SENATOR HENRY MELLO 

STAFF PRESENT 

CLIFF BERG, Executive Officer 

PAT WEBB, Committee Secretary 

RICK ROLLENS, Consultant on Bill Referrals 

NANCY MICHEL, Consultant on Governor's Appointments 

ALSO PRESENT 

MICHAEL H. CARRILLO, Warden 
California State Prison at Wasco 

BOYD H. GIBBONS III, Director 
Department of Fish and Game 

SENATOR MIKE THOMPSON 

JOHN GRANT, President 

California Association of Professional Scientists 

JAMES HAMILTON, Conservation Director 
California Trout 

JOHN BEUTTLER, Executive Director 
United Anglers of California 

SHARMAN WILSON 

Trout Unlimited of California 

NAT BINGHAM, Chairman 

California Salmon Trawlers Advisory Committee 

BILL DEMPSEY 
Nature Conservancy 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 



111 



APPEARANCES (CONTINUED) 

BRYAN S. GUNN, Warden 

California State Prison at Calipatria 

MICHAEL T. PICKETT, Warden 
California Institution for Men 

ROBERT H. RIVINIUS, Member 
Board of Governors 
California Community Colleges 

THEO WHITE, Warden 

Chuckawalla Valley State Prison 



19 

20 

21 



23 

24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



INDEX 
Proceedings 

I 

Governor ' s Appointees ; 

'MICHAEL H. CARRILLO, Warden 
[California State Prison at Wasco 

Background and Experience 

Activation of New Prison at Wasco 

Community Programs 

Inmate Programs 

Compliance with Affirmative Action Goals 

Motion to Confirm 

Committee Action 

BOYD H. GIBBONS III, Director 
Department of Fish and Game 

Background and Experience 

Question by SENATOR PETRI S re: 

Position with National Geographic 
Questions by SENATOR MIKE THOMPSON re: 

Proposed Personnel Shuffling 

Proposed Appointment of AL JOHNS as 
General Counsel 

Proposed Construction of Screened Pumping 
System by Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District 

Alternatives 

Predisposed Opinion Concerning Wine 
Industry 



iv 

Page 

1 



1 
1 
1 
2 
2 
2 
3 
4 

5 
5 



10 
11 

12 



V 



1 

2 Witnesses in Support: 

3 JOHN GRANT, President 

California Association of Professional Scientists 13 

4 

JAMES HAMILTON, Conservation Director 
5 California Trout 14 



6 JOHN BEUTTLER, Executive Director 

United Anglers of California 16 

SHARMAN WILSON 

8 Trout Unlimited of California 16 

! 

9 NAT BINGHAM, Chairman 

California Salmon Trawlers Advisory Committee 17 

•o 

BILL DEMPSEY 
M jj California Nature Conservancy 18 

ij 

12 Comments by SENATOR MELLO re: 

13 Impressed with Nominee's Ability to 

Respond to Constituents 19 

14 

Withdrawal of AL JOHNS as Candidate 

15 i for General Counsel of Department 19 

ii 

16 Request of Five Senators to Delay 
Confirmation 20 

17 
18 



19 



20 

21 



23 

25 i 
26 



I! 



Alternatives 20 

Discussion of Alternatives 20 

Position of SENATOR THOMPSON on Delay 23 

Discussion of Delay and Alternatives 24 



Request of SENATOR MELLO to Delay Decision 
22 on Confirmation for 30 Minutes 28 



Statements by CHAIRMAN ROBERTI re: 

Request from Five Senators to Delay 

Confirmation 29 

Discussion 29 



Decision of CHAIRMAN ROBERTI to Hold Over 

Confirmation on Call of Chair 31 

28 






1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



VI 



BRYAN S. GUNN, Warden 
[California State Prison at Calipatria 

i Background and Experience 

Prison Programs 

Questions by CHAIRMAN ROBERTI re: 

! Location of Calipatria 

! 

Motion to Confirm 

Committee Action 

MICHAEL T. PICKETT, Warden 
California Institution for Men 

Background and Experience 

Motion to Confirm 

Statement of Opposition Expressed from 
the Audience 

Statement by CHAIRMAN ROBERTI re: 

Practice of Holding All Confirmations on 
Senate Floor for Period of Two Weeks 

Committee Action 

THEO WHITE, Warden 

Chuckawalla Valley State Prison 

Background and Experience 

Questions by CHAIRMAN ROBERTI re: 

Number of Inmates 

Security Level of Inmates 
Questions by SENATOR PETRIS re: 

Inmate Participation in Literacy Programs 

Recidivism Rate of Inmates Who Have 
Participated in Literacy Programs 

Motion to Confirm 



32 
32 
33 

33 
35 
36 

36 
36 
37 

38 



38 
39 

39 
39 

41 
41 

41 

42 
42 



Vll 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



Committee Action 

ROBERT H. RIVINIUS, Member 
Board of Governors 
California Community Colleges 

Previous Experience on Board and Future Goals 

i 

Motion to Confirm 

i 

Committee Action 
Termination of Proceedings 
Certificate of Reporter 



43 

43 
44 
44 
45 
45 
46 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



1 

i| 

P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 

i. 

— ooOoo — 

I 

1 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Michael H. Carrillo, Warden of 
i 1 
, California State Prison, Wasco. 

Mr. Carrillo, we'll ask you what we ask all the 

Governor's appointees, and that is why you feel you're qualified 

to assume this position? 

MR. CARRILLO: Well, if I may, Senator, I'd like to 

I greet all of you, Mr. Chairman, other distinguished Senators and 

j Committee Members. 

My name is Michael H. Carrillo, acting Warden at the 

i! 

:| Wasco State Prison Reception Center. 

i 

And to answer your question, I believe I am qualified 

for the position of Warden because of the following. I have 

i| 
been employed by the California Department of Corrections for a 

|i 

I period of 25 years. I have worked at four different 

I I institutions throughout the State of California. I promoted 
[through the ranks in 14 distinct positions during my career. 

I have been Chief Deputy Warden in the Correctional 

'Training Facility for a period of six years, and that was 
j 
excellent experience. But the greater challenge has been the 

■activation of the new Wasco State Prison Reception Center, the 

largest one ever built, the most modern and advanced in terms of 

its technology. It has provided the opportunity to develop 

excellent community and law enforcement ties. We are definitely 

j. 
in juvenile diversion programs, child abuse prevention programs 

with the community, not only the surrounding city but the county 



2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



2 

i ! 
as well. We have an excellent team that's been involved in 

|| 

deploying and developing of toy drives, fund drives, basically 

to assist the disadvantaged of the area. 

We also have one of the finest citizens advisory 

committees, at least that's my opinion, and they are dedicated 

to doing a good job and learning about the prison system, as we 
!| 

are in explaining to them how the process works. 
ij 

We also have some excellent volunteer programs. We 

have — at one time we had up to 25 members of the community 

[coming into the prison system to learn about the jobs so they 

can avail themselves of the examination process and later become 

ii 

|j employees based on the exposures that they have received. We 

welcome that. We continue to have one of the best records in 
| terms of volunteers in that respect. 

Also in terms of work programs, community crews, 
|; academic programs, working closely with the City of Wasco and 
'neighboring communities, we have now been able to access 
[community college assistance, and we are working to better not 
;|only the inmate population academically, but also the staff 

through new video programs. 

I couldn't ask for a better position in terms of 

support from the community. They've been genuine; they've been 
(sincere, and they've been supporting. I'm very fortunate to 
I; have had that exposure and that experience. 

As far as affirmative action and the goals of the 

California Department of Corrections, I believe that we are in 
[total compliance or close as close to total as anyone has ever 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 



3 
been. And our hiring record shows that we were able to hire 
perhaps in one of the few instances 50 percent of the local 
residents of a given county. So, we're very proud of that 
record. 

The Wasco State Prison Reception Center was activated 
, in July of 1991. Currently we house over 4500 inmates, and we 
have approximately 1,040 staff. The activation itself required 
a tremendous amount of dedication, both during the day, the 
evening, and traveling, and being involved in numerous meetings 
to plan out not only the policies and procedures, but also to 
work closely with the entire activation of the recruitment 
aspects of a new prison. 



13 jj 

This monumental effort, raising a prison from the 

14 

I ground up to its full activation, has been the most challenging 

15 

program or project of my career. It is something that I am 

16 ji 

j proud of. I believe I have done so successfully, thanks to the 

17 ,: 

"help and support of many good people. 

18 

I believe I qualify for the position of Warden. 

19 !J 

Thank you. 



20 

21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Thank you very much. 
Is there anyone here in opposition? 
Are there any questions? 

I think, Mr. Carrillo, you're going to get off real 
easy today. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Move Mr. Carrillo. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Senator Craven makes a motion. 

Secretary, call the roll. 



I 

I! 
2 : 

j 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II j 

12 

13 
14 
15 
16 

17 
18 
19 

20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 



4 
SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 
SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 
Senator Mello. 
SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 
Senator Petris. 
SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 
Senator Craven. 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

i 

Senator Roberti. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Roberti Aye. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: The vote is five to zero; 
confirmation's recommended to the Floor. 

Congratulations . 
i MR. CARRILLO: Thank you very much, 

i [Thereupon the Senate Rules 

I 

Committee acted upon legislative 

agenda items . ] 

i 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Boyd H. Gibbons III, Director of 

i 

the Department of Fish and Game. 

Mr. Gibbons, we will ask you what we ask all the 
Governor's appointees, and that's why you feel you're qualified 
to assume this position? 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



5 

MR. GIBBONS: Mr. Chairman, Senators, the Department 
of Fish and Game has the responsibilities for the trust of the 
wildlife of the State of California, and these issues, and the 
conservation and environmental issues surrounding, have been 
issues that I ' ve worked on in one way or another for most of my 
adult life. 

My interest in these issues really stems from my 
childhood passions, which began growing up as a young boy in 
Southern California, hunting with my — and fishing with my 
father at Lake Henshaw and for quail in San Diego County. And 
I pursued these interests, and the broader issues of wildlife 
conservation and conservation in general, throughout my public 
life. 

I am a fourth generation Calif ornian, a westerner, 
my great-grandfather came here in 1890, started a small grocery 
store. And my grandfather came out from Missouri because he 
couldn't stand the winters, and heard there was good quail 
hunting. That was in about 1905. My father was born in San 
Diego, and my mother was trained as a nurse at Hollywood 
Hospital. They were married here, and my father is still here, 
as are my aunts and uncles. 

My wife and I first met here in California, and we're 
glad to be back. Her family also are Calif ornians. 

I left California to move to Montana to a cattle 
ranch, and there my interests expanded, and my love for the out 
of doors had a wide range. It was there that I really began to 
get a great appreciation for the people who are the real 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 

19 

I 

20 

|j 

21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



6 
trustees of the land: ranchers and farmers. I went on to a 
small boarding school in Utah on the Wausatch Range, small town 
of Mount Pleasant, and then on to Arizona for college and law 
school, and some practice of law. 

I've really lived all over the west, and I feel that 
having returned now to California, having had a somewhat varied 
career in journalism and government that has covered much of the 
natural resource issues that this Department deals with, and 

many others besides, that California is, of course, involved in 

I 
great difficult issues dealing with the environment and 

wildlife, primarily because of the condition of geography and 

water, and the pressures of population. 

It's clear that much of the habitat that we care 

I 

about is on private lands, and it is here, with ranchers and 

farmers, that I feel a great affinity, and I want to enlist 
their help, for they really play an important role. 
i As for the Department, it is staffed by really 

dedicated and talented people who probably have some of the most 
difficult jobs in state government. But they have come a long 
way. 

It's my interest to see that this Department is 
service-oriented; that we assist the public, despite the fact 
that we, of course, have programs that require some regulation. 

I look forward to working with the Legislature, and I 
would appreciate your support. 

Thank you very much. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good, thank you. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 



17 



18 

19 
20 
21 
22 

23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



7 
Any Members of the Committee wish to make any comment 

at this time? Yes, Senator Petris has a question. 

SENATOR PETRIS: What did you do with National 

Geographic ? Were you — 

MR. GIBBONS: I was a writer, Senator, senior 

editorial staff, which is a fancy word for writer. 

It meant I went out on assignment all over the world, 

i! . . 

jimuch of it here in the west because this is where my interests 

lay, on various issues; some having nothing to do with these 

[subjects: the sense of smell; alcohol. I wrote of the Oregon 

Trail, and the — really the person who represents the 

profession over which I find myself, Aldo Leopold, who was the 

father of wildlife management. 

ij SENATOR PETRIS: Thanks. 

i! 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Senator Thompson has joined us and 

would like to take part in this interrogation. 

SENATOR THOMPSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and 
Members of the Committee, for allowing me to participate. 

Mr. Gibbons, I'd like to pick up on the point that 
you made regarding the dedicated employees of Fish and Game. 

I'm concerned about the proposed personnel shuffling 
that was outlined in a Department memo that came to some of our 
— the attention of some of us. And it's my belief that the 
folks who were mentioned in the memo and the employees that you 
mentioned in your opening remarks are, in fact, dedicated, 
knowledgeable individuals in their particular issue areas. 

I'm wondering what sort of justification there is for 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 

7 

I 

8 ii 

i 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 

24 ! 

j 

25 

ii 
26 

27 

28 



8 
a reshuffling of the nature outlined in that proposal. 

I have a specific instance in my district where one 
of the regional managers, who seems to have a wonderful rapport 
with all the folks who he works with, is actually proposed to be 
(demoted, I guess, to the wildlife manager position in the 
| Environmental Services Division, without cause. 

I'd like to know why that would even been considered, 
and how that would enhance the fisheries and wildlife? 

MR. GIBBONS: Certainly, anybody who takes over a 
large department like this, running a corporation, a department 
of government, has to look at the individuals there, make an 
assessment where they can best be used. I've been doing that as 
I travel around the state, meet with the staff. 

The memorandum you're referring to was not a decision l 
document. It was a — simply a discussion piece to me from a 
member of my staff with some possible options, and that's what 
it represented. 

SENATOR THOMPSON: Are you planning to follow up on 
that? Talk to people in the field; take into consideration the 
fact that these folks who are dedicated, experienced personnel 
in their areas, a move would not only be disruptive to the 
Department, to fish and wildlife, and the people who the 
Department serves, but to their personal life as well? 

MR. GIBBONS: Yes, I take into account, Senator. 

SENATOR THOMPSON: Who are you going to handle that, 
and how will we be able to ensure that those moves, the 
reshuffling, whatever part of it takes place, if any of it takes 



5 
6 

7 

l! 
8 I 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 

28 

II 



9 
place, is going to further the goal of your Department? 

If everytime a Director came in — and, you know, 
you're here for two years; there's a likelihood that after that 
it'll be someone else, and the next person comes in and 
reshuffles, how do we provide continuity over those resources? 

MR. GIBBONS: Well, Senator, there has been very 
little shuffling of people, as far as I can see, over many years 
in the Department. 

I don't intend to move people for the sake of moving 
people. I intend to try and find the best use of the personnel 
we have. 

SENATOR THOMPSON: Are the personnel choices that 
you're going to make, are they going to have fish and wildlife 
first and foremost as a priority, or are you going to continue 
to appoint and hire advocates for fish and wildlife? 

Before you answer, I just — there was a recent 
appointment of Al Johns as General Counsel. It's my 
understanding that not only did this individual sue the Water 
Resources Control Board when the Board attempted to set water 
temperature standards in an effort to protect salmon, but he 
also defended the Bureau of Reclamation's handling of the 
Kesterson toxic site, which was being passed off as a wildlife 
refuge . 

How does this appointment or hire of that nature 
further the goals of your mission? 

MR. GIBBONS: Well, there's been no appointment and 
no such hire. The individual you're referring to is no longer a 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



10 

candidate. 

I think it's unfortunate that the sort of discussion 
about him, I think it's been quite inaccurate, but I will — 

SENATOR THOMPSON: Were the two issues I pointed out 
inaccurate? 

MR. GIBBONS: I'm sorry? 

SENATOR THOMPSON: Were the two issues that I pointed 
out — the Kesterson issue and the water temperature standards 
issue — were those inaccurate? 

MR. GIBBONS: He represented the Bureau of 
Reclamation, yes. 

As for personnel decisions, I will make the best 
decisions I can. I think those decisions are vitally important 
in any organization, and I will do it thoughtfully and 
carefully. 

SENATOR THOMPSON: You and I had an opportunity to 

work on a Sacramento River project, the Glenn-Colusa Irrigation 
i 

District. They have a pumping station that's equipped with 
certain screens to prevent the suction of downward migrating 
fisheries into the farmlands. It's a screen — a pumping 
station that was designed, constructed, and continues to be 
maintained by the Department of Fish and Game. I think it's 
safe to say that it doesn't work. 

MR. GIBBONS: That's safe to say. 

SENATOR THOMPSON: And it's my understanding it's the 
Department's proposal that the Glenn Irrigation — Glenn-Colusa 
Irrigation District construct a $4 million screen system of 



I 1X 

1 ll 

I their own outside of the channel. 

2 I! 

I'd like to know if it is — if you're going to 
pursue, or at least look at, alternatives to an expensive 

4 

i construction of that type? I understand there's some new 

5 

technologies: sound technologies, some lighting technologies. 



6 

7 
8 

9 ' : 

|l 

10 j 

M ll 
12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 
18 
19 
20 

21 

22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 

n 



And it's also my understanding that the Department has been 

unwilling to consider any of that. 

i 

MR. GIBBONS: Yes, Senator, I did meet with you, and 
it was a very useful briefing. 

This, as you know, has been a long and difficult 
controversy over the fish screen. I think the Department has 
worked very diligently to work carefully with the District and 
all the parties involved. As you know, this is involved in the 
courts, and I don't wish to comment too far there. 

But I think we will find a solution. Paul Jenson, on 
our staff, has been working closely with the District and the 
federal agencies: National Marine Fisheries Service, and Fish 
and Wildlife Service. 

SENATOR THOMPSON: I think the District has a 
different understanding of what's going on. They feel that 
their direction now is to construct the new screened pumping 
system on the river itself, rather than the channel, a $40 
million project. And it's — and the direction is coming after 
Fish and Game's attempt to clear up the problem has failed. And 
there seems to be an interim solution that could be applied that 
is far cheaper and could be very effective. 

I think we need to look at that, along with the new 



II 

12 
I 

technologies. I'm not clear that the Department is willing to 

2 | 

do that. 

3 

4 

5 



6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

12 I! 

ii 

' 3 I 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



MR. GIBBONS: Well, I think that all the parties 
involved have been analyzing all these issues. And all I can 
say is, reasonable people are trying to reach agreement on a 
very difficult issue. 

SENATOR THOMPSON: And I have just one further 
question. 

As Director of the Department of Fish and Game, are 
jiyou are going to have to interface closely with a lot of 
! agricultural concerns in the state. One that's very important 
j'to myself, and I know Members of this Committee, is the wine 
l[ industry, under your land-use procedures, as well as their land 

(acquisitions. 

Ii 

It's been brought to my attention that there's at 

least some concern that you have a predisposed opinion of the 

jj industry, and that it may in fact cloud the relationship that's 

j! 

I going to be important for you to maintain with the wine 
'industry. 

MR. GIBBONS: Quite the contrary. I enjoy drinking 

their product. 

|j 

You may be referring to what we discussed the other 

day. 

SENATOR THOMPSON: I think it's the article, 
i "Alcohol, the Legal Drug." 

MR. GIBBONS: Yes, as it is indeed. 

I found early on, as a writer, as you must know in 



13 






3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



your role as a Senator, that one simply doesn't please everybody 
I 
all the time. And when you write a piece and it's published, 

you're going to get comments from all sides. 

But this doesn't reflect any attitude of mine towards 
the wine industry at all. 

SENATOR THOMPSON: The premium wine industry has made 
great strides — 

MR. GIBBONS: Yes, they have. 

SENATOR THOMPSON: — in setting themselves apart — 
ii 

MR. GIBBONS: Right. 

SENATOR THOMPSON: — from other similar industries, 

and are working hard to ensure that it's part of the food 

! components . And they're doing a very responsible job. I can 
understand, as I'm sure you can, the sensitivity that they have, 

|the concern that they have, and the need to make sure that we 

i! 

have a good relationship between the Department and that 
industry that is so important. 

MR. GIBBONS: Yes, that will be no problem. I 
remember visiting Semmi Winery in pursuit of this story. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Fine, thank you. 

Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to make 
comment, either pro or con? Fine, come forward, please; state 
your name. 

MR. GRANT: My name is John Grant. I am speaking 
today as President of CAPS, the California Association of 
Professional Scientists. CAPS represents about 2,000 scientists 
in state government: physicists, chemists, entomologists, and 



I 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 

18 
19 

20 

p 

21 

I 1 

22 ; 

[l 
23 

24 II 

23 j 

26 

27 



14 

I 

about 300 fishery, marine, and wildlife biologists that work 

i 

with Mr. Gibbons. 

I'm speaking today in favor of his appointment. We 
— my first experience with Mr. Gibbons was during the aftermath 
of the death of two of our biologists who crashed while 
investigating an oil spill. He immediately went to the area and 
showed great compassion to the families and to the coworkers of 
the individuals that were killed. I think that compassion 
represents his view toward the employees that he will oversee. 

I also feel that, after having several discussions 
with him, personal and in-group, that his environmental ethic is 
very strong and his personal ethic. I think he's the first 
Director in my memory, after 20 years as a marine biologist, 
Fish and Game, he's the first Director who even knows who 
Leopold was, let alone has read his book. 

I think it's important that we support him. 

I am somewhat surprised to be up here, supporting a 
Wilson appointee. In this case, I'm very pleasantly surprised. 

I think he's a great man for the job. 

i 

Thank you very much. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much, sir. 

Anyone else wish to comment? Any Member of the 
Committee? 

Yes, sir, come up. State your name, please. 

MR. HAMILTON: I'm James Hamilton. I'm the 
Conservation Director of California Trout. 

I'm here to speak today in behalf of Boyd Gibbons 's 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



15 
|| appointment. California Trout supports Governor Wilson's 
appointment of Mr. Boyd Gibbons to the position of the Director 
of the California Department of Fish and Game. We encourage the 
[Senate Rules Committee to confirm his appointment. 

The Department has been compromised for many years in 
Jits ability to protect fisheries and fish fauna. The reasons 

for this are many and varied: over politicalization, lack of 

J 
wherewithal. In fact, the Department has more or less been beat 

up on by other agencies that have a few more street smarts. 

Mr. Gibbons has taken on an unenviable job, and we 
are convinced he has done so out of personal conviction. We 
think we wants to help government get back for the fish what 
Mammon, the CVP, and the State Water Project have taken away. 

Mr. Gibbons, in our opinion, put his best foot 
forward when he reached the decision to curtail the stocking of 
striped bass in the Sacramento River in an all-out effort to 
bring salmon back from the brink of extinction. That decision 
was taken at the risk of alienating constituent groups that the 
Director needs as friends. 

We think it was the right decision, because it put 
the health of the ecosystem ahead of the fishery; it put the 
resource before special interest bartering. This is precisely 
the kind of government fishermen need. We believe that fish 
will continue to derive benefits as long as Mr. Gibbons holds 
this position. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much, sir. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 



16 
Anyone else? Yes, sir. State your name, please. 
MR. BEUTTLER: Mr. Chairman and Members, my name is 
John Beuttler. I'm the Executive Director of United Anglers of 
I California. This is the state's largest fishery conservation 
organization, representing some 80,000 anglers across the state. 
We're here to seek your support today and tell you of 
iour support for Boyd Gibbons to be confirmed as Director of the 
Department of Fish and Game. On behalf of our membership and 

the 60 affiliated sport fishing organizations that are part of 

. . ... 

our organization, I want to advise you that, in our opinion, the 

Director has demonstrated his concern for fish and wildlife from 



19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



a global perspective, a statewide perspective, and a local 
perspective every early in his acting directorship. 

We believe that he has demonstrated that this concern 
is in the best public interest, and that he will work actively 
to restore these resources that were once so important to 
i California's economy and could be again. 

We're convinced that he will do his level best to 
work with all of his constituency towards those objectives, and 
we therefor believe that we think that he will do an outstanding 
job, given the very difficult circumstances under which he will 
have to perform. 

| 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much, sir. 

i 

! Anyone else? Yes, ma'am. 

MS. WILSON: Hi. I'm Sharman Wilson. I represent 
Trout Unlimited of California, and it's one of the, you know, 
larger organizations. We have approximately 6,000 members in 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



17 
the State of California. 

We believe that Mr. Gibbons will bring both a clarity 

ij 

ijof vision to the Department, and have strong administrative 

I 

ji 

lability to the position of Director. We have had opportunities 

j| , 

to see him in action over the last few months, and we've liked 

j! 

— you know, we've liked what we see. 

Trout Unlimited appreciates the difficult task that 

confronts him as the Director, and sincerely wish to work with 

ii ... 

jhim in his endeavor to restore and manage California's fish and 

wildlife. 

And we'd appreciate your aye vote. Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much, Ms. Wilson. 

Anyone else? Yes. 

MR. BINGHAM: Good afternoon. My name is Nat 
Bingham. I'm former President of the Pacific Coast Federation 
of Fishermen's Associations, and I serve as Chairman of the 
California Salmon Trawlers Advisory Committee, better known as 
the Salmon STAMP Committee. I'm speaking this afternoon as an 
individual and Chairperson of the STAMP Committee. 

We had some concerns in PCFFA regarding the 
| appointment of Al Johns, and some of the other issues which were 
discussed earlier in this hearing. 

Thanks to Senator Mello's intervention, a meeting 

i 

took place between President Pietro Peravano, Dave Danbaum, a 
well-known fisherman, and most of those concerns were addressed 
and resolved. 

And I want to thank Mr. Mello for his efforts to 



18 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



resolve those concerns. 



So, I'm here this afternoon in support. I believe 

ithat Mr. Gibbons has demonstrated a strong commitment to the 

restoration of the salmon resource. And in the very desperate 
ij 
I situation we're faced with with the salmon industry almost out 

of business, it's that kind of commitment that we need to see. 
|i 

Thank you. 

II 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much, sir. 

i| 

Anyone else? 

MR. DEMPSEY: Mr. Chairman, I'm Bill Dempsey with the 

! California Nature Conservancy. The Nature Conservancy is an 

international membership organization of over 600,000 members 

[j 

i who manage the world's largest private reserve system and are 

I 

i 1 

(dedicated to the preservation of ecosystems and those species, 

particularly endangered ones, who are dependent upon them. 

I think Senator Mello, and I know Senator Thompson, 
know of our work in their districts. They also know that 
because we manage very substantial, sensitive areas in 
California, tens of thousands of acres, we know the problems 
that Mr. Gibbons will be confronted with. 

But we also know him, and hence, we encourage your 
support of his appointment. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you, sir. 

Anyone else? There appears to be none. 

Any questions? Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: I just want to make a few comments. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



19 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Please do. 

SENATOR MELLO: Some of the speakers alluded to this, 
land that is, I've been impressed with Mr. Gibbons' s ability. At 
'one time, a lot of these people that are here were concerned, 
and they expressed — and they came out with specifics with him. 
But I was impressed with Mr. Gibbons' s ability to sit down with 

these people and really respond to them. It indicated a 

] 

i continuing interest in keeping the dialogue going, not only 

before the confirmation, but after. 

I think that's something that has to be done. This 
j 
|Director's job in California, it's fish, and game, and wildlife, 

and wetlands, and habitat, and all kinds of scientific and 

biological resources, and I think he has a very good Department 

there, which needed, in my opinion, somebody with the commitment 

and the skills to administer it and really make full use of 

those staff. 

I just to say one thing to Senator Thompson about Al 
Johns, who was being considered, as I understand this leaked 
memo, to be the General Counsel for the Department in charge of 
the water situation. And it's true of the allegations you 
brought forth, there was those tie-ins, but I think once that 
surfaced, his name was withdrawn. 

Isn't that true, Mr. Gibbons? He's no longer under 
consideration? 

MR. GIBBONS: That's right, Senator. 

SENATOR MELLO: So, I think that was done because of 
many of the sports and game people in California who were 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



20 

i concerned. They did not want a person that had — even though 

attorneys, as I understand quite well, they represent clients, 

and sometimes they represent criminal violators, and one 
i 
interest or the other. That's really their job. 

But in this case, I think Mr. Johns had a history of 
really representing interests that were adverse to the best 
interests, I think, of the environment and Fish and Game. But 
he's no longer under consideration, so that issue's removed. 

There was a letter by five of our Members, and I 
don't know; maybe I can ask our consultant, Nancy Michel. They 
indicated they wanted to delay the confirmation. I don't know 
if they're still of that opinion or not. I think a lot of the 
opposition has bee removed. 

Would you care to comment? 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Mello, I think the President 
Pro Tern would like to delay a vote on the issue. Whatever 
comment you have, fine. 

SENATOR MELLO: Well, I just want to point out, we 
looked at all the different alternatives. He was appointed on 
January 2nd, 1992, which means that by the Government Code, his 
term would be up on January 2nd, 1993, and we'll not be back in 

session until a few days after that. 

II 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Right. 

ii 

SENATOR MELLO: He must be confirmed in August to be 

routinely confirmed. 
j| 

The only other option would be something I don't 
ii 
'think we've done, to my knowledge, and that is, he could be 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



21 
taken up when we come back in December to reorganize. That 
would be the last final, final date. 

I mean, I'm willing to support his confirmation today 
on the Floor, but I mean, if the majority of people want to hold 
; him up — the advantage of holding him up would just be another 

"two or three months of evaluation of his conduct. 

p 

I'm sort of betting on the come that he's made a 
i| commitment to keep working the best interest of the state's 
resources, and I just take him at that work and make sure that 
he does that. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I, of course, agree with you. I 
have no problem with that, but in deference to the Chairman, I 
made the comment that I did. 

Senator Petris, do you have something to elucidate? 

SENATOR PETRIS: Yes, I like very much what I've seen 
and heard today. 

But Senator Robert i was going to make that request, 
not on his own behalf, but two other Senators'. It may only be 
— five Senators — it may only be a couple, three weeks; I 
dont' know. He didn't specify how long. He didn't say, "Bounce 
it over until December." 

So, maybe we should do it at the call of the Chair, 
and see how much time we have. We may well do it before we 
leave . 

SENATOR MELLO: The other option would be to have the 
Pro Tem hold his name on the Floor until he feels he wants to 
take him up, and that would be beyond August, if he wants to 



1 

2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



22 
make that decision. 

SENATOR PETRIS: It could be. 

MR. GIBBONS: May I add something? 

SENATOR MELLO: Could we have — Cliff is not here — 
Nancy, I guess you'd be the one. Could you go to the phone and 
ask Senator Roberti if he'd — I don't want to dispute what 
Senator Craven is saying, but does he want to move him to the 
Floor and hold him there, or just hold him in Committee? 

MS. MICHEL: He wasn't specific on what it was he 
wanted. I think he's in the Governor's Office, but I'd be happy 
to try. 

SENATOR MELLO: Well, I stated my position, and I'll 
go along with what the Committee wants to do. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good. 

Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I have a question on waiting until 
December for the Rules Committee to act. 

There'll be a new Rules Committee and a new Senate; 
will there not? 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Well, by calendar, yes; by 
{personality, not necessarily. 

[Laughter. ] 

Ij 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I hope not, at least in some 
respects. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I don't want to foreclose the option 
or the opportunity that Senator Thompson and Senator Keene, and 
several other Senators, would have to make comment. 



I 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

10 

11 



12 ! 



13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 
20 
21 
22 

23 

i' 

24 

;i 
25 ii 

, | 

27 
28 



23 

But I'm wondering if we could bring this thing to a 
quicker conclusion than taking it, perhaps, to the month of 
December, and do it by the end of this month, August? Do you 
think that that would be a possibility? 

SENATOR MELLO: Senator Thompson is the only one of 
the five that's here. 

You signed the letter, and I know it was shown to me. 
And I felt, because I'm on the Rules Committee, I didn't want to 
;put my name on it, but you, and Senator McCorquodale, Marks, 
Boatwright, and Calderon. 

Is it still your feeling you want to hold him up, or 
do you want to let him go to the Floor, then we could make a 
decision there when to take him up, either in August or later if 
that's the decision. 

SENATOR THOMPSON: Senator Mello, my position, and I 
think I can speak for Senator Boatwright — he and I had a 
discussion earlier today — that I've received, and the reason 
I'm here, and the reason I met with Mr. Gibbons yesterday, is, I 
have received a lot of calls and letters on this particular 
appointment. 

Now, I've discussed with Mr. Gibbons some of the 
problems. I want an opportunity to further discuss with the 
people in my district their concerns, and maybe even bring Mr. 
Gibbons over, to allow him to meet with these folks, because 
they are, in fact, people you haven't had a chance to meet with. 

I know that Senator Boatwright feels the same way. 

Given the budget situation, I just don't know how 



1 

2 

3 I 

i 

4 ] 

I 

5 j 

6 ! 

7 

8 | 
9 

i! 

10 j 

11 

12 

|i 

13 !! 

14 || 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



24 
'much time we're going to have in August to able to do that. 
That's why we thought that coming back in December, we could 
give us all an opportunity to deal with our constituents in our 
districts. 

SENATOR MELLO: The problem with December, as I see 
the mechanics, would be, if the Rules Committee doesn't put the 
name on the Floor, the the Rules Committee would have to meet — 
because we're only going to be here one day in November — we'd 
have to meet in special session, and pull his name to the Floor 
without any notice to the public that he's up to be on the 
Floor. 

But putting it on the Floor now, then it's up to the 
Pro Tem, and really, the House, to move it in August or later. 
At least the Rules Committee would not have to undertake that. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: You know, when I think of the 
position that we're discussing today as Director of Department 
of Fish and Game, that's really a tough one under the very best 
I: of circumstances. All of us knew the gentleman who was this 
man's predecessor very well. 

And if there's one organization that seems to have 
the ability to draw a hell of a lot of conflict from the public, 
[that's it. 

i 

I don't think the fact that, you know, Mike has some 
problems with some of his people makes it particularly different 
than it's ever been in the past. And no matter how good or how 
bad, I suppose something that is as controversial as fish, and 
wildlife, and resources, and redwood trees, and things like 



25 

1 

I 

|ithat, they all fall into the same milieu: they have a tendency 

2 ' 

to ignite the emotion within so many people. 

3 

And I'm not saying there's anything wrong about that, 

4 

but I'm saying, is what they ignite something that they have 
; brought to the attention of this man or not? And if they have, 

6 

has he talked to them; has he in any way assuaged their feeling, 
or has he completely overlooked them? 

8 

I don't mind holding it over, but I would like to do 

9 

Jit with some thought that we could bring it to a more quick 

10 

! conclusion than taking it to the end of the year. It has a 

" ! 

.tendency to just put this gentleman on the weak end of the bow, 

ready to fall to the ground, and that's a very, very difficult 

13 

way to work. 

14 ; 

Those of us who are elected officials, we understand 

15 

jithat quite well, but appointees are a little different. 

16 jj 

SENATOR MELLO: Mr. Chairman, could I propose another 
[alternative? 



17 
18 
19 
20 

21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 



SENATOR CRAVEN: Sure. 

SENATOR MELLO: It might be a compromise. I spoke 

with Ms. Michel about this, and that would give us both 

'i 

flexibility. 

That is to put his question of confirmation up before 
the Rules Committee today, with the understanding that his name 

be held in Committee, even if approved. Give the Chairman of 

i j 

the Rules Committee authority to move that to the Floor in a 
week or two weeks. Or, if he sees that Senator Thompson and 
others want to re-open, then we can move reconsideration and 



! 26 

1 

have some additional information. But at least he would be, I 

2 

think, confirmed today, but held in the Committee, and it would 
3 

not go to the Floor until such time as either the Rules 

4 

Committee or the Pro Tem would do that. 

5 

I just want to accommodate Senator Thompson and some 

6 

'of our colleagues. If they do come up with something they want 

7 i 

Ito go over, they'd have a week. 

8 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good. 



9 
10 
II 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 



I have no objection with that. Let me ask Senator 
iPetris and Senator Beverly. Do you have any objection to that? 

SENATOR BEVERLY: As I understand it, we would vote 

I 

l today? 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Yes, sir. That's as I understand 

jwhat Senator Mello has — 

ii 

SENATOR MELLO: Vote today, but it will not go to the 



Floor — 



i 

i SENATOR CRAVEN: Vote today, and then hold it in 



18 
19 
20 
21 

22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



Committee for the President Pro Tem to come back, make a 
decision. In the meantime — 

SENATOR MELLO: Well, the President Pro Tem can move 
it to the Floor himself. I think we designate that power. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: That's right. In other words, those 
persons of the Senate who many stand in opposition still have an 
opportunity to — 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I still have concerns about waiting 
until December. 

I look at the calendar, and on November 30th, the 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



27 
Senate adjourns sine die . You get a whole new body. 

i 

I don't know that these things carry over. We've 
never run into it before. 

MS. MICHEL: Yes, they do. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: We're satisfied on that legal 

,i 

point, and I hope we never get to it. 

i| 

i 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Mello, what would you think 

;j 

of just holding the matter for a period of, we'll say, two weeks 

for a vote? 

j, 

SENATOR MELLO: Well, that's okay. I think two weeks 
from today, that puts it up on the 2 6th, and we'll be out of 
here by the 31st. There was some talk about us getting out on 
the 28th, because we did a lot of our August work — 

! 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Only in the case of a fire, I think. 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR MELLO: Assuming the budget's on, and all 
those other things. 

I mean, we could put it to a vote. I'd rather it go 
out. I rather support putting the vote up for confirmation, 
holding him here, and let Mr. Thompson, and Boatwright, and 
others, if there's reason to re-open the hearing, I think we can 
do it right here. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: In other words, your point is, let's 
vote now. 

SENATOR MELLO: That's what I'd like to do, but by 
doing that, Senator Thompson, I'm not taking away your right to 
bring some additional questions to him. He'll still be here 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 



14 ' 



15 
16 

17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 



28 
before the Committee, and the Pro Tem of the Committee can then 
move to re-open the hearing based on any new testimony. But at 
least, we'll get this behind us. Let the Pro Tem, whatever he 
wants, move this to the Floor, and it's taken up, and away we 
go. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I have no objection with that 
whatsoever. 

My only problem is the fact that I have been given 
direction by the Chairman that he wanted the matter held over. 

SENATOR MELLO: Okay, fine. He's the boss. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Now, let's chisel away at that for a 
moment . 

How long can we hold it over? 

SENATOR MELLO: My motion would be holding him over, 
but it would be with the positive — assuming that he would get, 
jlyou know, three votes or more from the Members that are here 

J 1 today. 

I! 

So, I'm sorry that we can't get ahold of the Pro Tem, 
because he could — 

I! 
I 

SENATOR CRAVEN: He's probably in the Governor's 

Ij 

Office, I would assume. 

SENATOR MELLO: Why don't we just delay action on 
this for 30 minutes or so? 



SENATOR CRAVEN: Do you want to do that? I think 



jj that's a very good idea. 

Do you think you could stand that? 

MR. GIBBONS: Thirty minutes is piece of cake, 



29 
'Senator. 

2 jj 

SENATOR CRAVEN: All right, let's do it. We'll just 

3 

hold the matter in abeyance and try to find our President Pro 

4 

Tem . 

5 •! 

Thank you very much. 
6 

Let's have a recess. We will be back at 4:00; that 

7 

gives us 17 minutes. 



8 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 

14 

1 

15 | 

,6 ! 

17 
18 
19 

20 
21 

22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



[Thereupon a brief recess was taken.] 
CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: The Committee will reconvene. 
There has been a request on the part of five Members 

to put your nomination over. This is not unusual. It happens, 

like, 50 percent of the time. 

We normally respect the request of a Member who would 

I 

| like to see the nomination put over. However, I'm told they 

i 

want to put it over until December 3rd. 

Without saying I don't want to do that, I think I 
should talk too them before I say that, but I would say that I'd 
put it over until August 26th, which is our last regularly 
scheduled hearing, at which time we'll take your confirmation up 
gain. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Mr. President. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Yes. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I'm aware of the five Senators to 
whom you have referred. 

It is my understanding from one of the staff of the 
Department that the nominee, Mr. Gibbons, has met with those 
five persons. 



i! 

1 i 

2 

lis. 

3 



30 

Well, I should let him tell you what the situation 



4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 

18 | 

,9 I 

20 || 
21 

22 |! 

li 

23 
24 

!' 

li 

25 

ij 

26 

I 

27 
28 



MR. GIBBONS: Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

i 

I've met with all five of the Senators, Senator Keene 
as well. And we went over issues that they were interested in. 

My own feeling is that none of them substantive, but 
ijl'm prepared to talk again with any Senator who's interested. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Only one of the Senators actually 
jihad a lengthy conversation with me concerning the issues that 
line's concerned about. I think that deal with personnel 
'j transfers — 

MS. MICHEL: That was discussed. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: — personnel transfers that 
;j probably, in the Senator's mind, also were substantive as to 
|| policy as well. 

I do not consider myself expert to even raise the 
{details of the question at this point. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: That was brought up. As a matter of 
fact, that was the first thing asked about today. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: I was in the Governor's Office. 
Unfortunately, I couldn't be here for the bulk of the hearing. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: The hearing, as a matter of fact, I 
thought was quite good. There was nothing acrimonious bout it 
whatsoever . 

Senator Mello had expressed an opinion of support, as 
had Senator Beverly, I believe, and I have myself. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: My wish would be — but I want the 



.1 

Members to feel free to vote whichever way they want. This 

2 

isn't a command, even if I could issue one — my wish would be 
3 

ito put this over until the 26th. 

4 jl 

The concerns of five Senators are just things that I 

5 

idon't want to take lightly, and that's normally what I would do 



6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 



.5 i 



to respect their wishes. 

If any of the Members feel strongly the other way, I 
won't be personally offended, but I think it's a judgment call 
on my part as far as accommodating the House is concerned. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Well, Mr. Chairman, as far as I'm 

concerned, that is basically what I was trying to do. I didn't 

ii , 

iwant to foreclose the instruction that we had received from you, 

l 

;but I think that that would give ample time for these Senators. 
CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: And then we'll take it up on the 

26th. 

16 

They'll probably still want — it's conceivable they 

»7 \ 

would still want to hold you up until December 3rd. I don't 
18 

Iwant to tell you what I would do, but then at that point I'm 

19 

sure there will be a vote. 

20 

But we normally do delay at the request of a Senator 

21 

i — usually of one Senator, this is five — on a position of 

22 

J, importance , and certainly yours is one of those positions that 

23 

Sis watched carefully because it's a policy area that all of us 

24 

'view as important, and many of the Members take a personal 

25 

interest in Fish and Game and related issues. 

26 |i 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Then may we — 

27 i! 



71 



CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Just on the call of the Chair, 






32 






2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



Iwe'll put it over for two weeks, until the 26th of August. 

I 

Without objection. 

I! 

SENATOR CRAVEN: No objection. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Without objection, such will be 

the order . 

Thank you very much. Maybe if you speak to them, 
il 
clear it up again, if there is anything to be cleared up. 

MR. GIBBONS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: The next nomination is Bryan Gunn, 

Warden of the California State Prison at Calipatria. 

Il 

Mr. Gunn, we will ask you what we ask all the 

i Governor's appointees, and that is why you feel you're qualified 

to assume this position? 

MR. GUNN: I'd like to thank the Chairman, Members of 

ilthe Senate Rules Committee, for the opportunity to share my 

1 1 

| qualifications with you. 

i 

Currently, I'm the Warden of the Calipatria State 

Prison in the Imperial Valley, California. 

I started in the Department October of 1968, so this 

October will be my 24th year. I worked my way up through the 

ranks, starting as a correctional officer. I've served as a 
j. sergeant, lieutenant, captain, program administrator, associate 

warden, chief deputy warden, and now I'm warden. 

I worked in seven different institutions and prisons 
(in this state during my career, plus two headquarters' 

assignments: one as the Administrator of Correctional Training 
i at the Academy in Gait, California, from 1983-85; and the other 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



33 
as the Chief of the Department of Training from 1986-87. 

We opened the prison at Calipatria January 2nd, 1992. 
We've been open roughly seven and a half months. We now have 
3,000 maximum security inmates in that prison. 

;| In terms of my education, I've worked my way through 

school. When I started, I had a high school education; worked 

my way through four years of college with a Bachelor's in Public 

II 
Service Management. I also have a community college teaching 

credential in public services administration. 

We now have a fully functional prison. We're still 
in our activation stage, which means we're still receiving 
inmates . 

We have a fully functional citizens advisory 
committee down there. We have very, very strong public support 
in the Imperial Valley. They've been very good to us and open 
with us. We've worked very hard to maintain a good relationship 
with them. 

I have started several programs at the prison while 
we were activating. We have our literacy program underway; we 
have our Arts in Corrections program underway. We have 
vocational and academic training underway, and in the very near 
future, once we've received the entire complement of inmates 
that the Department sees fit to send me, then we'll have all of 
our programs in place. 

By inclination, by training, by education, and by 
desire, I feel that I'm qualified for this position. I've gone 
through the steps that the Department and I feel are necessary 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



34 

i 1 

to get the experience to run this type of a facility. 

We're one of the newly designed prisons. It's a very 
i 
large facility. 

We have an interesting climate down there in the 

Imperial Valley. We've got 115 degree daily temperature or 

ji 
above. We have sand storms on occasion, a lot of insect life. 

; | 

[ Laughter . ] 

MR. GUNN: A lot of interesting things to contend 

with down there. 

:! 

But I've never in my career have met such nice people 
ij 
las in that Valley. They really wanted us there, and have been 

''very supportive. We're very, very happy to be there. 
II 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Where is Calipatria? 

MR. GUNN: Calipatria, it's 14 miles north of 
Brawley, which is itself 15 miles north of El Centre 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Oh, yes, now I know; the garden 
spot; Salton Sea country. 

MR. GUNN: That's right, Salton Sea. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: As someone who used to represent 

that area, I know quite well, and I know exactly exactly what 
ji 
this gentleman is talking about. 

I 

If you get promoted out of there, you go to the 

French Foreign Legion. 

[Laughter. ] 

MR. GUNN: In any event, I'm happy to be there. I 
have very, very good staff who are working very hard. 

I feel with those qualifications that I can continue 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



35 

j! 

to do a good job there. 

|i 

Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I'm happy to move the confirmation. 
i 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Senator Cravens has a motion to 

irecommend Mr. Gunn's confirmation, Warden, Calipatria, to the 

! Floor. 

Any other questions? 

Is there any support or opposition? 

Our hearings on Corrections officials either are the 

li 

|: longest ever or very short . 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Let's hope we can follow the latter. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: I think you're lucky, Gunn, 
coming into the very short category. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I just wanted to say that the 
representative of the Association of Black Correctional Officers 
has said that they were supportive of all the candidates. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Thank you; that's very good to 



know. 



Then Senator Craven's motion is before us. 
The Secretary will call the roll. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 
SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 
Senator Mello. 
SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 
Senator Petris. 



36 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



SENATOR PETRI S: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 
Senator Craven. 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 
Senator Robert i. 
CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Roberti Aye. 
CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: The vote is five to zero; 
j confirmation's recommended to the Floor. 
Congratulations . 
MR. GUNN: Thank you very much. 
CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Michael T. Pickett, Warden, 
California Institution for Men. 

r] 

Mr. Pickett, we will ask you the question we ask all 
the Governor's appointees, and that is why you feel you're 
qualified to assume this position? 

MR. PICKETT: Mr. Chairman and Senators, I appreciate 
the opportunity to appear before you and to enumerate my 
qualifications for the job. 

I have 23 years with the Department of Corrections, 
the last seven of those years as a mid or high-level manager. I 
began my career in 1969 as a correctional officer in San 
Quentin. I subsequently worked and promoted my way up through 
the ranks to my current position as the Warden for approximately 
the last year at the California Institution for Men. 

During my early part of my career, I pursued my 



3 

4 ! : 

5 il 
6 
7 
8 
9 

10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 

16 i 

18 | 
i 

19 
I 

20 

!: 

21 

|| 

22 
23 
24 j 

i! 
25 

26 I 

I 

27 

l| 

i! 
28 !, 



37 
academic upgrading, receiving my Bachelor of Science Degree in 
police administration at Cal State University, Los Angeles in 
1973. 

During my career, I've had the opportunity to have a 
positive impact in a number of different areas. I think the 

chief of which, and I am the proudest of, is, I was instrumental 

i 

j in implementing the current ethics program and the — creating 
the organizational values statement that the Department of 
Corrections uses. The ethics program remains in effect at this 
time for both managers and virtually all staff within the 
Department . 

I bring with me the qualifications, both as having 
worked in the institutions, approximately five years in the 
Parole Division in Los Angeles. I've spend approximately seven 
and a half years as investigator, both as senior agent and 
special agent with our Investigative Services in Los Angeles and 
the greater Bay Area. 

I bring with me, I believe, a well-rounded background 
with headquarters experience, institution experience, and parole 
experience. I feel that broad base of experience has set me in 
good stead for the duties that I have at this time. 

Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Any questions? 

Is there any support or opposition in the audience? 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Move. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Senator Craven moves that 
confirmation be recommended. 



38 
1 

I have somebody who raised his hand. 

2 

FROM THE AUDIENCE: I have opposition, but I gave a 
3 

statement to your secretary. 

4 ! 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: You do have a statement before us. 

5 i 

Do the Members of the Committee have a copy of that 

6 | 

1 statement? 

7 ii 

MS. MICHEL: It came just before we came to 

8 ( 

|i Committee. There is no copy. You do not have it. 

Mr. McClure came into the office just before we came 

ji 

into Committee. 
il 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Yes, we do have your statement, 

Mr . McClure . 

We will vote today on Mr. Pickett's confirmation. 

What we normally do, however, is, we hold the confirmation on 
!; 
the Floor for two weeks. That will give everybody a chance to 

review statements, additional support letters, additional 

opposition letters, and well make sure that your letter is 

distributed to the Members of the Committee. 

But in the meantime, we will vote on the matter now. 

Senator Craven moves that the confirmation be recommended to the 

i 1 
Floor. 

|! 

Secretary will call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

Ii 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 
Senator Mello. 
SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 



9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



39 
SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 
Senator Petris. 
SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 
Senator Craven. 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 
Senator Roberti. 
CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Roberti Aye. 
CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: The vote is five to zero; 

\ confirmation is recommended to the Floor. 

1 

To all the nominees, to let them know, we do hold 

I 
these for two weeks on the Floor. 

MR. PICKETT: Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: We have one more prison official, 

ii 

so I think I'll take that one up, since that's what we're doing 

right now. After that we'll go to Mr. Rivinius, Community 
i 

i! 
II Colleges. 

P 

I'd like to take up Theo White, Warden of Chuckawalla 
Valley State Prison. 

Mr. White, we'll ask you the same question we asked 

23 |! 

I the others, and that is why you feel you're qualified to assume 

24 

this position? 

25 

MR. WHITE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman; thank you, 
I; Committee Members . 

27 

I have 28 years in the Department of Corrections. I 



l 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 

22 

I 



-> 



8 ; 



40 

I 

worked in a variety of positions. I started my career in kind 

of in a nontraditional way. I started out in the medical field; 
3 

I started out as an x-ray technologist. I was promoted to 

4 j 

senior x-ray technologist, supervisor of vocational education, 

5 

supervisor of correctional education, associate warden, chief 

6 

deputy warden, and currently I'm in the position of Warden at 

7 j 

CVSP, which is Chuckawalla Valley in Blythe. 

8 j 

I have a Bachelor's Degree from Cal State Long Beach 

9 

in education. I have a Master's of Arts Degree from Orange 

10 

College — I'm sorry, from Chapman College in Orange. It has 

11 !. 

i! later been upgraded to a university. I also have a M.S. Degree 

12 i| 

'in educational administration from California State University 

13 j| 

at Fuller ton. 



14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



I 

Today's prisons are rather complex, and I feel that 
ray diverse background has prepared me rather well for the 
position of Warden. Even though the primary function of a 
prison is to maintain those who have been sent — admitted by 
the courts in a secure manner, there are many other activities 
that must also take place to be sure that the prisons are 
operating in a safe, secure manner. Those include education, 
both academic and vocational, Arts in Corrections, and a host of 
other self-help programs, such as NA and AA programs. 

I could cite many individual accomplishments, but 
none would be as great or as significant as my ability to work 
with people. I think that's the key. Any successful 
organization that shows continuous progress, the manager is one 
who has the ability to work with, supervise, and manage people. 



41 

1 

I have those skills. 

2 

Chuckawalla Valley is located in southeast section of 

3 

Riverside County. We're the largest employer in the area. 

4 

About 75 — I'm sorry — 25 percent of the employees are local 

5 i 

people, which gives a very big boost to the economy. We are 
6 

!very well received in the community. We have a very active 

7 || 

trade advisory council and a very active TAC. 

8 

My prison is run very smoothly, and I feel that with 

9 

,:the continued support of this Committee, it will continue to do 
10 I 

SO. 

11 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Thank you very much, Mr. White. 

12 'l 

How many inmates? 
13 

MR. WHITE: We have 3200, sir, and 750 employees. 

14 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: What level of prisoner? 

15 

MR. WHITE: It's a Level II. 

16 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Any other questions? 

17 

Is there anybody here in opposition? 



18 



Question, Senator Petris. 



19 •' 

SENATOR PETRIS: Do you have any literacy programs 



20 
21 

22 
23 

24 I 

i 
ii 

25 i 
26 
27 
28 



going on? 

MR. WHITE: Yes, sir. We have a very excellent 
literacy program. 

SENATOR PETRIS: What percentage of the population 

takes part? 

i 

MR. WHITE: In the overall Education Department, a 
third of our inmates participate in education, and about 25 
percent participate in the literacy program. 



42 

1 

Our education program goes through literacy, ESL, ABE 
2 ! ! 

Level I, Level II, and GED and high school. 

3 

SENATOR PETRIS: Has there ever been a study made on 

4 

the recidivism question, comparing those who become literate in 

s ! 

prison and those who don't take part as far as their rate of 

6 

recidivism is concerned? 

7 

MR. WHITE: Yes. 

Many years ago, I participated in a study. I was a 
part — I was a member of a team that did a study. And our 
results did unequivocally prove that a person who upgraded 
himself tend to not come back as often as those who did not. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Is that limited to one prison, or is 
it the common experience around the state? 

MR. WHITE: It's the common experience around the 



8 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 

18 

II 
il 
19 



state, I think. 

SENATOR PETRIS: So it's proved itself? 

MR. WHITE: Yes. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Thank you. 



CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Do I have a motion? 

20 I! 



21 ' 

l| 

22 

23 

j 

24 i 

25 

26 

27 
28 il 



SENATOR CRAVEN: Move, Mr. Chairman. 
CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Senator Craven moves Mr. White's 
confirmation be recommended to the Floor. 
Secretary will call the roll. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 
SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 
Senator Mello. 



43 
1 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 
2 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 
3 

Senator Petris. 

4 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 
5 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 

6 li 

ii Senator Craven. 

' I; 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 



8 

9 
10 
11 

13 i 

'l 

14 



Senator Roberti. 
CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Roberti Aye. 
CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: The vote is five to zero; 
confirmation is recommended to the Floor. 
Congratulations . 



15 

MR. WHITE: Thank you, sir. 
16 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: The next nomination is of Robert 

17 |l 

H. Rivinius, Member of the Board of Governors of the California 



18 
19 
20 
21 

22 

ii 

23 I 

24 i 

|l 

25 \ 

26 

ii 

27 
28 



I Community Colleges. 

Good to have you with us this afternoon. 

MR. RIVINIUS: Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: We will ask you what we ask all 
the Governor's appointees, and that is why you feel you're 
qualified to assume this position? 

MR. RIVINIUS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members. 

I was confirmed for this seat four years ago, so I 
won't repeat what I told you back then. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: That's right. 



44 

1 ! 

MR. RIVINIUS: I would just state that I have served 
for four years. As my term was expiring, I was elected Vice 
iPresident of the Board, which means if I stay out of trouble, I 

4 

may be elected President next year. That's the way it usually 
goes, and I would like to serve through that. 

6 

This is just for a two-year term, so I would be off 

7 j 

ijthe Board after that. 

8 

So, I would like to continue my service. I feel I've 

9 : ! 

made a contribution and would ask for your recommendation for 

10 

| confirmation. 

n 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Thank you. 

12 

I might point out, the Faculty Association of 
13 ii 

ji California Community Colleges is in support. 

14 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Move Mr. Rivinius. 

15 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Senator Craven moves confirmation 

16 ! 

■be recommended to the Floor. 

Is there any support, opposition, observations? 

18 I 

Hearing none, Senator Craven's motion is before us. 



19 

20 
21 



22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



Secretary will call the roll. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 
SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 



SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 
Senator Mello. 
SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

i 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 

ji 

Senator Petris. 
SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 



45 



SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 

2 

Senator Craven. 
3 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

4 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

5 

Senator Roberti. 

6 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Aye. 

7 

SECRETARY WEBB: Roberti Aye. 

8 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: The vote is five to zero; 

9 

confirmation is recommended to the Floor. 

10 

Congratulations . 



n 

I 

.2 

13 I 

14 ii 
15 

16 

17 
18 

! 

19 j 

20 

ii 

21 



23 

24 i 

l| 

25 ; 
26 



MR. RIVINIUS: Thank you. 

[Thereupon this portion of the 
Senate Rules Committee hearing 
was terminated at approximately 
4:30 P.M.] 

— ooOoo — 



27 
28 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 



14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 



46 
CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER 

I, EVELYN J. MIZAK, a Shorthand Reporter of 
the State of California, do hereby certify: 

That I am a disinterested person herein; 
that the foregoing Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
reported verbatim in shorthand by me, Evelyn Mizak, and 
thereafter transcribed into typewriting. 

I further certify that I am not of counsel 
or attorney for any of the parties to said hearing, nor in 
any way interested in the outcome of said hearing. 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my 
hand this / I day of August, 1992. 




^P^VELYN' J , 

Shorthand Reporter 



24 

25 " I 

i 

26 

I 

ii 
27 



8 



209-R 

Additional copies of this publication may be purchased for $5.00 per copy 
plus current California sales tax. 

Senate Publications 

11 00 J Street, Room B- 15 

Sacramento, C A 95814 

Make checks payable to SENATE RULES COMMITTEE. 
Please include Senate Publication Number 209-R when ordering. 



^ 



HEARING 

SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 










STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 19, 1992 
2:05 P.M. 



UOCUMEUTS DEPT. 
StP 1 1992 

f>|. -.: 



210-R 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



HEARING 



STATE CAPITOL 
ROOM 3191 
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 19, 1992 
2:05 P.M. 



Reported by: 



Evelyn J. Mizak 
28 Shorthand Reporter 



11 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

DAVID M. CAFFREY, Member 

15 Public Employment Relations Board 

16 A. VERNON CONRAD, Member 

California Regional Water Quality Control Board 

17 Central Valley Region 

18 SENATOR DAN McCORQUODALE 

19 ASSEMBLYMAN JIM COSTA 
GEORGE ZENOVICH, Lobbyist 



20 



APPEARANCES 
MEMBERS PRESENT 
SENATOR DAVID ROBERTI, Chair 
SENATOR WILLIAM CRAVEN, Vice Chair 
SENATOR NICHOLAS PETRIS 
SENATOR ROBERT BEVERLY 
SENATOR HENRY MELLO 

STAFF PRESENT 
CLIFF BERG, Executive Officer 
PAT WEBB, Committee Secretary 
RICK ROLLENS, Consultant on Bill Referrals 
NANCY MICHEL, Consultant on Governor's Appointments 

ALSO PRESENT 



21 RICHARD L. HARRIMAN, President 

Golden State Wildlife Federation 

22 

ANITA FAZEEL 

23 Citizens Action Committee 

24 DICK CAMPBELL, Real Estate Broker 
Fresno County 

25 

CAMILLE WILLIAMS, M.D., Member 
26 California Medical Board 

Division of Licensing 

27 
28 



Ill 



3 



APPEARANCES (CONTINUED) 

HOWARD TOBIN, M.D. 

American Academy of Cosmetic Surgeons 



FAYE SMITH 
EARLINE GOODMAN 



JAMES A. BOOKER, JR., M.D. 

4 Torrance 

5 GARY CARTER 
Orinda 

6 

LARRY SCHOENROCK,M.D. , Director 
7 Divison of Facial and Plastic Surgery 

University of California at San Francisco 

8 

CAROL CAMPBELL 
9 Mill Valley 

10 KIYONI SANKARY 

U ROBERT WASHINGTON, M.D. 
Anesthesiologist 

12 

13 

14 

STEVEN STANTEN, M.D. 

15 Orinda 

16 WILLIAM DUNCAN II, Warden 
California Mens Colony 

17 

LEON RALPH, Legislative Advocate 

18 Association of Black Correctional Workers 

19 IVALEE C.H. HENRY, Warden 
Mule Creek State Prison 

20 

HOPE VASQUEZ 

21 National Mexican-American Correctional Association 

22 DONNA McKINNEY, President 
Women in Criminal Justice 

23 

GEORGE E. INGLE, Warden 

24 California Medical Facility 

25 ROBERT RIOS 
LIFE AIDS Lobby 

26 

JIM LEWIS 
27 ACT UP and CHAIN 

28 



IV 



1 APPEARANCES (CONTINUED) 

ANNE WOOD, Client Services Coordinator 
Sierra-Foothills AIDS Foundation 

3 

JAMES GOMEZ, Director 

4 Department of Corrections 

5 VELVA JOY HARRIS 
Sierra-Foothills AIDS Foundation 

6 

ALAN LOFASO 

7 AIDS Project Los Angeles 

8 ELLEN YELLOWBIRD 
ACT UP and CHAIN 

9 

FATHER PATRICK LESLIE, Catholic Chaplain 

10 California Medical Facility 

11 T. WARREN JACKSON, Member 

Fair Employment and Housing Commission 

12 

PEGGY L. KERNAN, Warden 

13 Solano County State Prison 

14 SUSAN CHAFFER, Chapter President 
CCPOA 

15 

16 

17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



1 

2 
3 

4 

5 Governor ' s Appointees t 



INDEX 

Paae 
Proceedings 1 



6 DAVID M. CAFFREY, Member 

Public Employment Relations Board 1 



Background and Experience 1 

Questions by SENATOR PETRIS re: 

Replacement of MR. CUNNINGHAM 2 

Improvements Needed in Board 3 



7 

8 

i 
9 

10 

11 

Personnel Duties When Working for 

12 GOVERNOR DEUKMEJIAN 5 

13 Motion to Confirm 5 

14 Committee Action 6 

15 Motion for Reconsideration 126 

16 A. VERNON CONRAD, Member 

California Regional Water Quality Control Board 6 

17 

18 
19 
20 
21 

22 



Background and Experience 7 

Questions by SENATOR PETRIS re: 

Enforcement Actions 8 

Range of Fines 9 

Assessment of Present Water Quality 9 



Federal Statute on Abatement of Toxics 

23 Being Discharged into Waters 9 

24 Policy on Waste Discharge 10 

25 Worst Problems Being Confronted 10 

26 Underground Water Management 10 

27 Introduction by ASSEMBLYMAN COSTA 11 

28 Questions by SENATOR DAN McCORQUODALE re: 



VI 



1 INDEX (CONTINUED) 

2 Support for STEVE BOND Being on 
Oversight Committee to Clean up Penn 

3 Mine Project 14 

4 Reasons for MR. BOND'S Removal 

from Project 15 

5 

Reprimands of MR. BOND Due to His 

6 Working Overtime 16 

7 Discussion 17 

8 View on Recycled Sludge 18 

9 Need for Staff to be Innovative 19 

10 ADM Permit Application 20 

11 Knowledge of When to Have an EIR 

under CEQA Regulations 20 

12 

Quote from Public Hearing 

13 Transcript Regarding EIRs 21 

14 Directive from MR. CROOKS regarding 

Penn Mine 22 

15 
16 

17 



Witnesses in Support: 

GEORGE ZENOVICH, Former Senator 23 

Witness with Concerns; 



RICHARD HARRIMAN, Attorney 

19 Golden State Wildlife Federation 23 

20 Regularly Minimizes Importance of 

Environmental Impacts 24 

21 

Ignoring During under CEQA 25 

Questions by SENATOR CRAVEN re: 

Did Nominee Prevail in Cases Cited 25 

Witnesses in Opposition; 



22 

23 

24 

25 

ANITA FAZEEL 

26 Citizens Action Committee, Fresno 26 

27 Voting Record Goes Against Guidelines of 

General Plan and CEQA 26 

28 



vii 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



INDEX ( CONTINUED) 



Lack of Concern about Water and Water Issues 
in Voting for Urban Development 

DICK CAMPBELL, Real Estate Broker 
Fresno 

Specific Vote to Approval a Project 
Previously Denied by Planning Commission 

Nominee's Position on EIRs 

Statement of RADLEY REEP 

Rebuttal by MR. CONRAD 

Motion to Confirm 

Committee Action to Reconsider 

CAMILLE WILLIAMS, M.D., Member 
California Medical Board 
Division of Licensing 

Background and Experience 

Goals of Division 

Questions by SENATOR PETRIS re: 

Licensing of Foreign Graduates 

Possible Conflict of One Board 
Member Operating a 1324 Program 

Witnesses in Support: 

HOWARD TOBIN, M.D. 
Abilene, Texas 

JIM BOOKER, M.D. 
Torrance, California 

GARY CARTER, Former Patient 

LARRY SCHOENROCK, M.D. 

CAROL CAMPBELL, Former Patient 
Marin County 

KIYONI SANKARY, Mother of Former Patient 

ROBERT WASHINGTON, M.D. 



27 

28 

29 
30 
31 
35 
36 
37 

37 
38 
40 

43 

44 



45 

47 
48 
50 

51 
52 
53 



viii 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



INDEX (CONTINUED) 

54 



FAYE SMITH, Former Patient 

EARLINE GOODMAN, Former Patient 
Memphis, Tennessee 

STEVE STANTEN, M.D. 

Questions by SENATOR PETRIS re: 

Tenure at U.C. Medical, San Francisco 

Ability to be Tough on Board 

Motion to Confirm 

Committee Action 

WILLIAM DUNCAN II, Warden 
California Mens Colony 

Background and Experience 

Witness in Support: 

LEON RALPH, Legislative Advocate 
Association of Black Correctional Workers 

Motion to Confirm 

Committee Action 

IVALEE C.H. HENRY, Warden 
Mule Creek State Prison 

Background and Experience 

Questions by SENATOR PETRIS re: 

Location of Mule Creek Prison 

Witnesses in Support: 

HOPE VASQUEZ 

National Mexican-American Correctional Association 

LEON RALPH, Legislative Advocate 
Association of Black Correctional Workers 

DONNA McKINNEY, President 
Women in Criminal Justice 

Motion to Confirm 



55 
55 

56 
57 
57 
58 

58 
58 



60 
60 
61 

61 
61 

63 



64 

64 

64 
64 



IX 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

il 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



Questions by SENATOR CRAVEN re: 

Place of Birth 

Committee Action 

GEORGE E. INGLE, Warden 
California Medical Facility 

Background and Experience 

Overview of Program and Mission at CMF 

CRIPA Consent Decree 

HIV Center 

Witnesses in Support: 

LEON RALPH, Legislative Advocate 
Association of Black Correctional Workers 

DONNA McKINNEY, President 
Women in Criminal Justice 

Witnesses in Opposition: 

ROBERT RIOS 
LIFE AIDS Lobby 

JIM LEWIS 

ACT UP and CHAIN (California HIV 

Activists and Inmate Network) 

By 1995, CMF Will be Largest AIDS 
Hospital in California and Largest 
HIV Population in World 

Pastoral Care Services 

Letter from MICHAEL HAGGERTY, Organizer 
of Pastoral Care Services 

Replacement of Experienced Medical Staff 

Confirmation Conversion 

Demands of ACT UP 

Lack of Overall Master Plan relating to 
HIV/AIDS 



INDEX (CONTINUED) 

65 
66 

66 
66 
67 
68 
69 



71 



72 



72 

73 

73 
74 

75 
76 
77 
77 

78 



1 



INDEX (CONTINUED) 



26 

27 
28 



2 ANNE WOOD, Client Services Coordinator 

Sierra-Foothills AIDS Foundation 80 

3 

List of Other Organizations Expressing 

4 Grave Concerns 80 

5 Conditions for Confirmation 81 

6 Questions by SENATOR CRAVEN re: 

7 Nature of Organization 84 

8 Contact with Facility Prior to 

AIDS Epidemic 85 

9 

Questions by SENATOR MELLO re: 
10 

Formal Policy relating to Treatment of HIV 

11 Positive Inmates and AIDS Inmates 86 

12 Compliance with Departmental Policy 87 

13 Housing of HIV and AIDS Inmates 87 

14 Questions of MS. WOOD by SENATOR MELLO re: 

15 Problem with Statewide Methodology of 

Handling HIV Positive Inmates 88 

16 

Testimony of JAMES GOMEZ, Director 

17 California Department of Corrections 89 

18 Questions by SENATOR MELLO re: 

19 CMF Treating Prisoners Differently 89 

20 Two Major Issues in Budget 90 

21 Patient Psychiatric Program 90 

22 HIV Center 90 

23 Recruitment & Retention Bonuses for 

Medical Staff 90 

24 

Philosophy on Treatment of HIV Postive 
25 Inmates 91 



Basis for Community Standards Relative 

to Medical Care 92 



xi 



1 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 



INDEX (CONTINUED) 



Number of Parole Violators Returning 

to CMF to Receive Adequate Medical Care 93 



Dollars Needed for Incarceration Plus 

AIDS Support Services 94 

JOY HARRIS, Retired Public Health Nursing Director 
Sierra-Foothills AIDS Foundation 95 

Background and Experience 95 

Downgrading Volunteers 96 

Deterioration of Support Programs at CMF 96 

ALAN LOFASO 

AIDS Project Los Angeles 97 

Ability of Inmates to Access Experimental 

AIDS Treatments at No Cost to Department 98 



Eight of MS. WOOD'S 15 Conditions Would 

13 Cost Department Nothing 98 

14 Need for More Aggressive Planning 99 



Questions of MR. INGLE by SENATOR BEVERLY re: 

Responsibility for Appointing Chief Medical 

Officer and Assistant Warden 99 



15 
16 

17 

ELLEN YELLOWBIRD 

18 ACT UP and CHAIN 100 

19 Disintegration of Support Services at CMF 100 

20 Questions by SENATOR CRAVEN re: 

21 Nature of Pastoral Care Services 100 

22 Deterioration of Chaplaincy 101 

23 Need for CMF Wardens to be Well-versed 

in AIDS and HIV 102 

24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



FATHER PATRICK LESLIE, Catholic Chaplain 

California Medical Facility 103 

Pastoral Care Services 103 

Program not Disintegrating 103 



Xll 

1 INDEX (CONTINUED) 

2 Questions by SENATOR CRAVEN re: 

3 Recruitment of Volunteers 103 

4 Difference between This Warden's 

Tenure and Predecessor 104 



19 
20 

21 
22 
23 
24 



26 
27 
28 



Questions by SENATOR MELLO re: 

What Can Legislature Do to Help 105 

Hospice Program in Budget Change Proposal 105 

Lack of Air Conditioning 106 

Double Celling of HIV Positive Inmates 107 

Electricity in All Cells 108 

Capacity for HIV/AIDS Inmates 109 

Questions by SENATOR PETRIS re: 

Psychiatric Outpatient Facility 110 

Average Stay 110 

Motion to Confirm 110 

Comments by SENATOR MELLO re: 



Lack of Authority to Impose 

Any Conditions 111 

Comments by SENATOR CRAVEN re: 

Excellence of Testimony on Both Sides 111 

Increased Interest in Problems at CMF 111 

Committee Action 112 



T. WARREN JACKSON, Member 
25 Fair Employment and Housing Commission 113 



Background and Experience 113 



xiii 



1 INDEX ( CONTINUED! 

2 Questions by SENATOR MELLO re: 

3 Percentage of Ethnic Populations in 

State Employment 117 

4 

Need to Do More in Area of Affirmative 

5 Action in State Employment 118 

6 Motion to Confirm 118 

7 Committee Action 119 

8 PEGGY L. KERNAN, Warden 
Solano County State Prison 120 



Background and Experience 120 

Witnesses in Support: 



Motion to Confirm 123 

Committee Action 124 



9 

10 

11 

SUE CHAFFER, Chapter President 

12 CCPOA 121 

13 DONNA McKINNEY, President 

Women in Criminal Justice 122 

14 

15 

16 

Request by SENATOR PETRI S to Re-open Vote and 

17 Request for Reconsideration on CAFFREY 124 

18 Motion to Re-open Vote 124 

19 Motion to Reconsider on CAFFREY 125 

20 Committee Action 126 

21 Termination of Proceedings 126 

22 j Certificate of Reporter 127 
23 

24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



1 
P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 
— ooOoo — 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I guess we can go right to the 
appointees. Let's begin on Governor's appointees appearing 
today, the first is David M. Caffrey, Member, Public Employment 
Relations Board. 

Mr. Caffrey, good afternoon. We'll ask you, please, 
to state your name and tell us why you feel that you are 
qualified for this very important post. 

MR. CAFFREY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members. My 
name is David Caffrey. I was appointed to the Public Employment 
Relations Board in January, following 20 years of experience in 
state government. I spent approximately nine of those years in 
the Department of Justice in a variety of positions, including 
Chief Administrative Officer of the Department. 

More recently, I served for nine years in the 
Governor's Office as Governor Deukmejian's Administrative 
Officer and Cabinet Secretary, and as Governor Wilson's Deputy 
Chief of Staff for Administration last year, 1991. 

Throughout my career in state government, this 20 
years, I've worked on many challenging policy and administrative 
issues, and they've required me to be developing sound 
recommendations for the people I was working for, and on many 
occasions, to make fair and intelligent decisions on my own. 
And it is this background which I believe, this experience, has 
prepared me well to serve as a member of the Public Employment 
Relations Board. 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



2 

As a member of the PERB Board, my primary 
responsibility is to decide disputed cases in the labor 
relations area that come to the Board. It's my responsibility 
to thoroughly review the record of that case and to make a fair 
and intelligent decision which is consistent with the labor law 
framework within which the PERB operates. 

But perhaps the best indicator I think I could point 
to of my ability to serve as a member of the PERB Board is my 
performance during the last seven and a half months when I've 
actually been on the Board. During that time, I have 
participated in approximately 40 formal Board decisions and 
actions, and I believe that through those decisions and actions 
I've demonstrated that I am a fair and effective member of the 
Public Employment Relations Board. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you. 

Any questions? Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: First an aside. You replaced 
Mr. Cunningham? 

MR. CAFFREY: Yes, I did. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Was he the Governor's education 
person prior to that? 

MR. CAFFREY: No. 

SENATOR PETRIS: He was not the same Cunningham? 

MR. CAFFREY: Alex Cunningham worked in the Toxics 
Division. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: He did a little bit of everything. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



3 

MR. CAFFREY: Yes. 

You're thinking of Bill Cunningham, who was Governor 
Deukmejian's education advisor for a few years. 

SENATOR PETRI S: Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Al was a wonderful man. He had the 
Office of Emergency Services — 

MR. CAFFREY: Water Resources. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: He worked very closely with Governor 
Brown when Governor Brown was head man. He was a magnificent 
person. Very sorely missed. He and I went to the same high 
school, so I feel very close to him even though he's gone. 

Go ahead, Nick. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Thank you. 

I'm interested in how you think the Board is 
operating in your seven months of activity? I'm looking 
particularly to find out if you think there are any major 
weaknesses or areas that need improvement. And if so, what 
improvements that you might suggest? 

MR. CAFFREY: Well, it's been a most challenging 
time, and it's continuing to be, Senator. And the challenges 
that you're dealing with here with regard to the state budget, 
of course, affect an agency like PERB, which is 100 percent 
general fund. 

About two years ago, we — it's a small department. 
We had about 87 positions. We're projected, when the budget is 
finally resolved here, to have about 50 positions this year. 

Now, that has demanded that every person, from the 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



Chairman of our Board down to the lowest level person in the 
department, put forth extra effort and whatever creativity we 
can muster to streamline our operations and still get the 
product out. 

For example, right now we're working with — the 
standard complement for our Board is five members. Previously, 
each member had two legal advisors and a secretary. A total of 
four positions per member, 20 for the Board. Right now we're 
functioning with four Board members, three legal advisors and 
two secretaries. So, you can see we're struggling with these 
budget concerns. 

We do have an advisory committee of our — of the 
constituents of the PERB, essentially made up of labor groups, 
and University of California, CSU, and the state employer. And 
we've been working with them to try and develop ways to 
streamline our process, but it's very difficult because the 
require — we operate in a quasi-judicial fashion, and we have 
to — when cases are heard by our hearing officers, our 
administrative law judges, you know, they need to be very 
thorough. It's an evidentiary record that could go to court, 
you know, if an appeal to the Board is further appealed to the 
Court of Appeals. So, it's very difficult. 

We've looked at everything from charging for just 
about every possible service that the interests that appear 
before us get from our department, to frankly, eliminating 
somethings, where we just have to prioritize them out, such as 
producing certain reports, or obtaining certain documents from 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



5 
school districts around the state. There's 1100 of them, and 
just the cataloguing of documents from all these school 
districts can take a full position. So, we've had to — 

SENATOR PETRIS: Is it fair to say that one 
improvement would be to have more help? 

MR. CAFFREY: Absolutely. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Good luck. 

[Laughter. ] 

MR. CAFFREY: It would also be fair to say it would 
be a big improvement not to have any less help at this point. 

SENATOR PETRIS: We know the feeling. We're very 
familiar with that. 

Now, when you worked for Governor Deukmejian, did 
your duties include anything related to personnel, either the 
Board itself or personnel matters? 

MR. CAFFREY: The — I generally concentrated on 
exempt personnel matters involving the Governor's staff. Part 
of my duties were as Administrative Officer to handle all that, 
but no — other than exempt employment matters — 

SENATOR PETRIS: Nothing that comes to this Board? 

MR. CAFFREY: No, no. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Anyone else? 

Anyone in the audience wish to speak in favor of the 
appointee? Anyone wish to speak in opposition? There appears 
to be no one. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Move it. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



6 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Petris moves. Call the 
roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 

Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

Senator Roberti. 

Three to zero. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Why don't we leave the roll open on 
that. We've got it out three-zero, but I think the other 
Members would like to be on the vote if at all possible. 

MR. CAFFREY: Thank you very much. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much, Mr. Caffrey. 
Congratulations . 

[Thereupon the Senate Rules 
Committee acted upon legislative 
agenda items. ] 

L 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Next item is the confirmation of A. 
Vernon Conrad, Member of the California Regional Water Quality 
Control Board. 

Why don't you come forward. I know Mr. Costa wants 
to be here. We'll give him an opportunity to speak when he 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 
24 
25 
26 

27 
28 



7 
arrives. 

Mr. Conrad, the first question we always ask all of 
the Governor's appointees is to tell us briefly why they feel 
they're qualified for this post. 

MR. CONRAD: Mr. Chairman and Senators, my name is A. 
Vernon Conrad. I've been appointed by the Governor to represent 
— as a representative from the supervisorial slot on the 
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. 

I think that my past experience has qualified me to 
take this position. I am now serving my third term as 
Supervisor of Fresno County, the first Supervisor to represent 
my district in over 60 years to have that privilege of having a 
third term. I've served as Chairman of the Board of Supervisors 
in 1984 and 1989. I also served representing Fresno County on 
the Med Valley Water Authority, West County Solid Waste Planning 
Commission, LAFCO, the San Joaquin Valley Supervisors 
Association, Chair of the Highway Task Force, the Southeast 
Regional Solid Waste Commission, County Supervisors Association 
of California, Chair of the Ag. and Natural Resources Committee. 

I have served in the past as president and member of 
the Alta Irrigation District, Director of Natural Resources on 
the Committee of the American Farm Bureau, Chair of the Water 
Committee for California Farm Bureau for a number of years. And 
I've served as Chairman of the Fresno County Farm Bureau for two 
terms. 

I've also served on the Board of Directors of the 
Kings River Conservation District, the Executive Committee of 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



8 
the Kings River Water Association, and a member of the Pesticide 
Advisory Group of the California Department of Food and 
Agriculture. 

I have a strong feeling that water and usable 
quantities and quality is the key to California's future, and I 
think that I am qualified to serve in this position. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Thank you. 

Any questions of the Members of the Rules Committee? 
Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: One of our Members did a survey a 
couple years ago, maybe it was last year, of all the regional 
boards to find out how they were doing in their enforcement. He 
found they were very, very lax. There were very few fines, and 
those that were imposed, speaking statewide now, compared to 
what the law provided as a maximum, were far closer to the 
minimum. 

I don't know the particular situation in your 
district. Can you comment on what the enforcement actions have 
been since you've been on the Board? 

MR. CONRAD: Senator, since I've been on the Board, I 
don't think that has been the case. In our situation, we have 
levied fines, I think, sometimes much greater than what staff 
has suggested that we levy the fines — 

SENATOR PETRIS: Can you give me some — 

MR. CONRAD: — commensurate with the problem that is 
created, I strongly believe that we need to correct problems 
and a fine, sometimes, is the only way to get people's 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



9 
attention. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Can you give me an idea of the range 
of fines? 

MR. CONRAD: Well, I think fines have ranged — and I 
am going to have to kind of — we have levied fines all the way 
from 30,000 up, and I'm not sure what the top — I wouldn't 
quote the top figure because I don't know that. 

SENATOR PETRIS: What would your assessment of the 
present quality of water be in your area right now? Is the 
quality of the water up to satisfaction or not? 

MR. CONRAD: I don't think so. I think that we're 
going to have to do a lot to raise the quality of water in a lot 
of areas. 

I have been a strong supporter of using tertiary 
treated sewer water. I think that's a necessity. I really feel 
that in order to accommodate the population that we see in 
California, and the growth that we're seeing, we're going to 
have to do everything that's possible to maintain the quality of 
the water that we have, along with the wise use of the water. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Is your county affected by the 
federal statute on abatement of toxics being discharged into the 
waters? I forget the title of that federal statute. 

MR. CONRAD: I think all counties are somewhat — as 
far as the county receiving a permit, is that what you're 
referring to? 

SENATOR PETRIS: Well, it's usually addressed to the 
local water quality water district, but it's supposed to be 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



10 
created through the county through the Board of Supervisors. 

MR. CONRAD: Our county does not have a — any 
discharge permits, the county itself. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Who has jurisdiction, the local 
water district? 

MR. CONRAD: Local water districts have most of the 
jurisdiction, some of the cities. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Do you have a clear policy now on 
waste discharge in your area? 

MR. CONRAD: Certainly. I'm — we're complying with 
the law, and it's not allowed. 

SENATOR PETRIS: What do you see as the worst 
problems that you're still confronting, if any? 

MR. CONRAD: Well, I think the drought has created a 
significant problem that the quality of water, the underground 
water is depredated, and usage of water and the water run-off 
has to be addressed. And in cases that it has been depreciated, 
it has to be brought back into the usable condition. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Does underground water management 
come under your agenda? 

MR. CONRAD: Not to my knowledge. 

SENATOR PETRIS: As a conservation measure to 
replenish? You haven't gone into that? 

MR. CONRAD: We have not gone into that. I would say 
that during my tenure on the Board of Alta Irrigation District, 
I was instrumental in getting their recharge program started, 
where all of the users pay a fee to achieve recharge in those 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



11 

years that there's water that's available. 

SENATOR PETRI S: Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Anyone else? Senator McCorquodale. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: Mr. Chairman, I don't know 
Mr. Costa's schedule. If he's on a schedule, maybe you'd want 
to let him comment, if he wanted to leave. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: He had wanted to introduce the 
gentleman. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very nice to have you with us. If 
you'd care to make some comment, fine. 

ASSEMBLYMAN COSTA: Briefly, Mr. Chairman, Members of 
the Rules Committee, I want to thank you for allowing me — 
while I didn't quite make it in time to introduce Supervisor 
Conrad, I have known him for a period of over 16 years, both in 
his capacity as a farmer, as a leader within various 
organizations in our county, and as a member of the Board of 
Supervisors. 

During that time, I have found him to be accessible. 
I have found him to be not only conscientious but sincere and 
very open in his attempt to try to hear all sides on any given 
issues as he attempts to carry out his own responsibilities in 
the positions that he has served in. 

As such, while Mr. Conrad and I have not agreed on 
every single issue over that period of time, while we've had our 
differences on various issues, I nonetheless believe that he 
would do a good job as the appointment that the Governor has 
recommended him for and would serve on the Water Quality 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



12 
District Regional Board in a fashion that would be fair-minded, 
and would discharge those responsibilities to the best of his 
ability. I have not doubt about those factors. 

He and I, as the former Chairman on the Assembly 
Committee on Water, Parks and Wildlife, have had numerous 
discussions and involvement with one another on water-related 
issues for not only the Valley but for the state. He 
understands, as do, I think, most people who are familiar with 
water-related issues, that if we are to balance both the 
short-term and long-term water needs in this state, we have to 
comply with five basic common sense tools to being good 
custodians and stewards of our water resources. That is that we 
have to balance our short-term and long-term needs with five 
basic management tools, and they involve water conservation; 
they involve water development; they involve water reclamation; 
they involved water recharge; and they involve water transfers. 
And it's not just one of those by themselves that are going to 
solve our short-term and long-term water needs in terms of 
quantity, but also in terms of quality it's the balancing of 
those five management tools that will allow us to plan and 
develop compromise and consensus over the long term. 

I think that without hesitancy, I would adhere to 
recommend and introduce to you a gentleman that I've known for 
some 16 years. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much, Assemblyman 
Costa. 

Now, Senator McCorquodale. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



13 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I 

appreciate the chance to join you for few minutes this 

afternoon to raise some issues during Supervisor Conrad's 

confirmation hearing. 

i 
I had an opportunity to meet with him yesterday and 

found him to be forthright and very concerned about many of the 

issues that I raised, but I thought that I should come raise 

some, because in my opinion, the Central Valley Regional Water 

Quality Control Board is sort of a regulatory agency that's 

running amok. On the one hand, it over regulates and creates 

problems, and on the other hand, it's very lax, and it doesn't 

seem to have very much of a philosophy or mission that's very 

well stated. And so, the only hope I see for that is that the 

members that are appointed or re-appointed come to grips with 

the problems that I think are there. 

The Central Valley is very — water, as was pointed 
out, is a very critical issue. On the one hand, you have to 
conserve, and to ensure that the water that is available and 
there is clean, is — and meets standards for use. And on the 
other hand, that the availability of that water is not damaged 
by other actions that might take place. 

Recently, the Natural Resources and Wildlife 
Committee held a hearing on the Penn Mine Issue, which is a mine 
that ' s an abandoned mine above Commanche Reservoir in the 
Valley, and that is causing a serious pollution problem. 

The district, the Regional Board, in conjunction with 
an operator some years ago formed a plan to deal with that, and 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



14 
sort of seems to have bought into the issue of how they're going 
to manage this, but they've become more — less of a regulator 
and more of an operator. 

I just wanted — and Senator Johnston and I just 
wrote a letter recently to the Board and to the Executive 
Officer, urging that Mr. Steve Bond, who, after he testified 
before the Natural Resources Committee, was removed from his 
position of dealing with the Penn Mine project and given the job 
in the underground tank issue, completely separate, and was 
given a memo that he could no longer be involved at all in the 
Penn Mine issue. 

He has a lot of information, and I think generally 
both sides — both the regulated agency as well as the federal 
and state agencies that have dealt with it — feel Mr. Bond is a 
good person and very knowledgeable in that issue. 

We've asked that he be put on the committee that — 
the oversight committee for the cleaning up of that project. 

I wondered if you'd had a chance to gain enough 
knowledge about that that you could say whether you could feel 
comfortable in supporting Mr. Bond being a member of the 
committee. He'd still work — he would not be working directly 
with it. This is a committee made up of federal, local and 
state agencies, and it would put — but it would put his 
expertise in a position of being known, of being available. 

Have you had a chance to review that? 

MR. CONRAD: I really haven't, Senator, but I firmly 
believe that those of us that are in a position of making 



1 

2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



15 
decisions need to have all of the facts at hand. And I would 
certainly welcome any information. I'm not suggesting that 
information go around the staff at all, but I would certainly 
welcome any information and that information being copied to 
myself and other Board members. 

I think although we do have a large amount of 
material to go through to prepare ourselves for those meetings, 
I'm dedicated to whatever amount of time that takes, and I will 
review all of the material. 

I would rather not comment on personnel matters until 
I have a thorough understanding of that. I'm a new kid on the 
block, so to speak, and a lot of these things regarding Penn 
Mine, in fact all of them, occurred prior to my coming on board. 

I don't believe in — I will say this, I don't 

j 
believe in personnel being chastised when they come forward with 

information. I think that anyone that's in a quasi- judicial 

role needs all of the information available. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : In the change of location of 

Mr. Bond, they gave the reasons for his being removed, one of 

them being that: 

"Events surrounding the lawsuit 
filed by the Committee to Save the 
Mokolumne River on Penn Mine require 
that the staff assigned to the 
project be firmly committed to 
support the Board's position. Your 
association with parties who have 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



16 
sued the Board comprises the Board's 
position on the lawsuit." 

When we had Mr. Crooks and the other administrative 
people from the Board before the Committee, they all agreed that 
they had no evidence that he had communicated or had given any 
information that was privileged information to anyone outside, 
but that was one of the issues and reasons that they reassigned 
him. 

How would you feel about that? 

MR. CONRAD: Well, again, I want all of the facts, 
and I don't think that hearsay is a reason to make an evaluation 
of that nature. 

I think anything that — and I'm not sure how 
extensive, but I know in other public meetings, all of the 
information is public. I think it should be. And I would have 
a certain concern about anybody being muzzled, so to speak. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : One additional issue that I 
would raise with this one, just to give you an idea of what 
you're going to be facing there, if nothing else, prior to 
actually reassigning Mr. Bond, I suppose that they were 
concerned about and wanted to establish some record. They sent 
him — they reprimanded him for five things, all of them related 
to his working hours. Two of read: 

"You're working more than eight 
hours without prior approval." 
I suppose in government, that's a heresy, that anybody would 
work more than eight hours. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



17 

MR. CONRAD: I would like to have my employees that 
dedicated. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : It goes on to say that he 
worked two days in July at 11 hours and two days at 12 hours, 
and two days at 12.5 hours. 

Then the third one was: 

"You're continuing to work Saturdays 
and Sundays without approval." 

Would that bother you a little that somebody would 
get chastised for that? 

MR. CONRAD: Yes, it does. I would hope that all 
state employees would be — 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Let me interject here, if I may. 

Isn't it possible that persons working eleven and a 
half hours are working overtime? 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: They don't get overtime. It 
was in relationship to a feeling that the District Board had or 
the staff had that he had accumulated time that he used as flex 
time. So, there was some question — they have a flex time 
operation on the Board, but — 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I guess I understand that answer, 
Dan, but you know, I'm you experienced it when you were a 
supervisor, and you're a supervisor presently. You recognize 
that the Public Works Department doesn't go out and just 
arbitrarily work more hours just to make more money when it's 
not authorized. 

Isn't that correct? 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



18 

MR. CONRAD: That's correct. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: I don't think that overtime 
was an issue, at least that was never raised to us. 

One other area that I would like to just call to your 
attention and get a reaction, there's a company called ADM 
Company. They've had contracts with several Bay Area 
municipalities to collect their waste water sludge, treat it, 
then sell it as low cost fertilizer to farmers in the Valley, 
primarily grazing land, and grape and tree fruit land. 

The Food and Ag. Code specifically states that 
agricultural products derived from municipal sewage sludge shall 
not be regulated as waste. East Bay Municipal Utility District 
and L.A. have similar sludge operations and don't have a permit 
from the regional water boards. 

Mr. Crooks, who's the Executive Officer, has insisted 
that ADM get a permit. They said that they — and he has in a 
memo said that he's not regulated by the Ag. Code; he's only 
regulated by the Water Code. 

Took him a year, it's been over a year now, that 
they've been processing that. Recently, Mr. Crooks has agreed 
to allow a pilot program if the details can be worked out, so 
they really haven't reached a point of giving him a permit. 
He's lost a couple of the contracts for facilities in the Bay 
Area. 

How do you view recycled sludge? Do you think 
there's a use for that in the agricultural process? 

MR. CONRAD: I certainly do, as long as they can pass 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



19 
the health related problems that are associated with it. 

I am aware of other entities that are doing that, 
bringing sludge from Southern California into the Valley. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: Now, health wouldn't be an 
area that you would have the responsibility for, though, would 
it? There are standards that are established, I understand 
that, but — 

MR. CONRAD: I have no problem with recycling 
anything. I think that recycling whatever material we have is 
certainly something that we have to look at and utilize to the 
best efficiencies that we possibly can. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: What about the issue of only 
being governed by the Water Code? 

MR. CONRAD: I'd have to get some information in this 
regard. I have a problem with any entity that's being treated 
differently than any other entity of the same type. Fairness is 
something that is incumbent upon us all. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: Would you view the 
responsibilities of the Board and the staff of the the Regional 
Board as having some need to be innovative in the use of 
recycling and re-use of products, in this case water, for 
fertilizer products, or something like that? 

MR. CONRAD: I think that goes without saying, that 
if we need to investigate new uses for things, and if it's 
permissible, that that be allowed. And I say permissible, I 
mean permissible by law. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: In the time, the four or five 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



20 
months that you've been there, has the Board ever been apprised 
of the ADM application? Has that surfaced to you, or did you 
get any information on that? 

MR. CONRAD: One — one of these situations did come 
before the Board, and I — my memory does not define it as that 
one. I'm not sure. I'd have to look at notes and see whether 
that came before the Board. 

We did have one that came in regards to — they 
already were doing a pilot program in the Dos Palos area, that 
this material was, I believe, coming from the Bay Area. And I 
believe the Board action in that case was to allow that to be 
expanded . 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : A very controversial activity 
related to the Board has been whether projects that come before 
the Regional Water Board have to have an EIR. There was an EIR 
issue related to the Penn Mine, and there 've been some others. 

Are you familiar enough with CEQA to know when it 
demands an EIR? 

MR. CONRAD: Well, I think that's a judgmental 
decision, but I think that anything that is — has a great deal 
of activity regarding it, whether it be controversial or there 
are a lot of things involved, I'd prefer to have an EIR. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: So, if you felt there was a 
need for one, you would not hesitate to require an EIR? 

MR. CONRAD: Certainly not. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: Let me just get your reaction 
in connection with some information that was sent to us in 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



21 
connection with a public hearing on a general plan amendment in 
Fresno County, in which the transcript indicates that you said: 

"Well, Mr. Chairman, I'm going to 
second that motion." 
This was to proceed on without the EIR. 

"I think this matter of requiring an 
EIR is fine if you want to hassle 
people, create as much problems for 
them as you possibly can. I think 
that's one way of doing it. I think 
it's used almost on every project 
with that purpose in mind." 
Is that what you intended to say? 

MR. CONRAD: I think that's what I intended to say in 
this particular project. There's other projects very close to 
that project that we have required EIRs on. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : This was pretty strong, where 
you said: 

"I think it's used almost on every 
project with that purpose in mind." 
MR. CONRAD: Well, I would think that that probably 
was incorrect. 

I think if you'll look at my voting record, you'll 
find that I have voted to require EIRs on the majority of the 
projects. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: One last comment, Mr. 
Chairman, and then I'll be through. 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



22 

This is a memo that was sent by Mr. Crooks to his top 
— his assistant, his deputy. He's talking about the Penn Mine 
again. And they're talking about whether they should require a 
rehabilitation plan for the Penn Mine. He ends it by saying: 

"Your assignment is to talk to our 
attorneys into doing nothing, or at 
the most, giving East Bay Municipal 
Utility District a permit to do 
exactly what they're doing now. 
Lots of luck on this one." 
Is that an appropriate directive for the top person 
to send to — 

MR. CONRAD: I would think that that was not 
appropriate. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : I only do that so you get an 
idea of what you're getting into. 

Well, I hope to communicate with you a lot, keep you 
informed on issues that I see. I think that you are getting 
into — on a board here that is very critical in that it seems 
to have a hard time finding its way on the good, solid path of 
dealing with water quality, at the same time being able to make 
maximum use of reclaimed water to the extent that it would be 
good in the Valley to be able to do so because of the shortage 
of water that's there. 

MR. CONRAD: Senator, I have a policy that, as a 
Supervisor, that my board — my door is always open, within 
certain limits, that the certain issues we are not allowed to 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



23 
talk to people after things go before the Planning Commission. 
That's a rule that our Board has adopted. 

But I certainly like to know all the facts before I 
make a decision. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you. 

Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to 
testify? Yes, sir. 

MR. ZENOVICH: Mr. Chairman, Members, George 
Zenovich. 

I'd just like to ask that you confirm Mr. Conrad. 
He's a distinguished Supervisor in Fresno County, has been there 
for many years. 

When I was a Member of the Legislature, I always 
considered him my expert on water issues, and always consulted 
with him on water issues. 

I think he would do a good job here. Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much, Senator 
Zenovich. 

Anyone else who wishes to speak? Yes, sir. 

MR. HARRIMAN: Mr. Chairman, Members of the 
Committee, my name is Richard Harriman. I'm an attorney with 
the firm of Harriman and Gabrielli, 1150 Ninth Street, Suite 
1219, Modesto, California 95354. 

I'm appearing this afternoon on behalf of the Golden 
State Wildlife Federation, of which I'm the President. I'm also 
the General Counsel for Citizens for a Healthy Environment, an 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



24 
ecology action educational institute. 

Since Supervisor Conrad is sitting next to me here, I 
want to make it absolutely clear that I do not intend my 
comments this afternoon to be personal or ad hominum in any 
way, but I have had a significant opportunity to observe 
Supervisor Conrad over a seven-year period in his role as a 
Supervisor, reviewing projects in Fresno County. 

I have some grave reservations and concerns about his 
ability and commitment to meeting the mandate of the California 
Environmental Quality Act, and also meeting the mandate under 
the public trust doctrine enunciated by our Supreme Court in the 
National Audubon Society vs. Superior Court case, a 1983 case. 

Let me tell you why so I can be brief. I know you're 
eager to move on, and the temperature here is such that it 
encourages us to do that. 

I find Supervisor Conrad regularly to deminimize 
[sic] the importance of environmental impacts, specifically with 
respect to cumulative impacts. This is particularly important 
in the position for which he is being appointed, in that we are 
going to see large scale agricultural operations — mega dairies 
— which will have significant cumulative impacts on surface and 
ground water quality, and similarly, because we will see an 
ongoing debate and controversy involving water needs for natural 
habitat concerning fish and wildlife. 

I have been present and appeared on the following 
projects in which I think there was substantial evidence 
presented, including evidence from staff, in which Supervisor 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



25 

Conrad voted not to require an Environmental Impact Report, and 

exhibited precisely the type of attitude and conduct exemplified 

by Senator McCorquodale's testimony from other people: The 

Donlevy Ranch Project; the Ball Ranch Project, which he also 

approved that was — required an EIR but there was substantial 

■ 

evidence that that project should not proceed in view of CEQA 

violations; the Harris, Donovan Harris Project; the Kesterson 

Project; the Askins Projects; the Brighton Crest Project in 

which the environmental review was completely defective. 

We're very, very concerned about Supervisor Conrad 
■i 
sitting on this Regional Board if he continues to ignore his 

duty under CEQA and the public trust. Yet at the very least, if 

this honorable committee elects to vote do pass on this 

nomination, we would hope that Supervisor Conrad would be aware 

of our strong concerns in these areas, particularly with respect 

to large scale agriculture as it is coming into the Valley from 

other areas. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Let me ask you a question, if I may. 

MR. HARRIMAN: Certainly. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: On those cases that you quoted, was 
the Supervisor, or did the Supervisor prevail? 

MR. HARRIMAN: Yes. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: He did. So, in other words, he 
wasn't the only person who thought in the manner in which you 
have described. 

MR. HARRIMAN: Absolutely not, Senator. And I 
clearly acknowledge it, and I'll also say for Supervisor Conrad, 



1 

2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



26 
he's always treated me with great respect and deference as a 
member of the public testifying before him. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good. You made that clear at 
the outset; we understand. 

MR. HARRIMAN: Thank you for the opportunity to 
testify. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Our pleasure. 

Anyone else? Yes, ma'am. 

MS. FAZEEL: Members of the Senate Rules Committee, 
my name is Anita Fazeel. I live at 614 East Woodhaven Lane, 
Fresno, California. 

I'm here speaking for the Citizens Action Committee 
in opposition to the appointment of Vernon Conrad to the 
Regional Water Quality Control Board. Our opposition is based 
on his voting record, which goes against the guidelines of the 
Fresno County General Plan and the California Environmental 
Quality Act. 

He has voted to approve urban level development in 
rural areas which lack water to support such development. 

I have quite a bit of information here which I will 
not really go through, since Mr. Harriman went ahead and went 
through some of that as far as CEQA and whatever. What I would 
like to do is go back and address some of these applications 
that he had voted to go ahead with approval, with the knowledge 
of the staff not being in support of approval. That he was 
aware, for instance, on General Plan Amendment 313, Donovan 
Harris, Supervisor Conrad voted to approve this plan amendment 



27 

1 

on March 31st without an EIR, despite the existence of massive 



2 

ii 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

I 
9 

10 

11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



public controversy over wildlife and native plant impact and 
groundwater impacts. And despite unanswered questions regarding 
regional water supply, the waste water plant and sludge disposal 
plant, et cetera. 

On General Plan Amendment 3 67, Brent Kesterson was 
the applicant. This Plan Amendment would convert planned 
agricultural area to residential uses, creating 12,000 
500-square foot residential parcels. 

With the waste water disposal plant, no sludge 
disposal capability and public water system. There would be 125 
homes on 90 acres in areas where there are normally 20 acres to 
one home is the ruling. 

Fresno County General Plan policy states that this 
area north of the Enterprise Canal does not even have sufficient 
groundwater to support rural residential two-acre lots 
development. 

Vernon Conrad voted to approve this project on March 
31st without an EIR, despite the existence of public controversy 
over urbanization outside of existing spheres of influence. 
There are unanswered questions regarding area-wide groundwater 
impacts, waste water, and sludge disposal. 

I can continue on, but there have been a number of 
other incidents where his voting has indicated he's not 
concerned about the water, the water issues that are available 
to the general public. When he continues to vote for urban 
development in rural residential areas. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



28 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Do you have a particular position 
which would reflect a preference to agricultural zoning and use, 
or do you move in the other direction? 

MR. FAZEEL: Basically in the area that we're — the 
I'm discussing, northeast area of Fresno, it has been determined 
there is not enough water in that area to do urban-type 
developments. There is farming in that area, but it's being 
turned into areas where, all of a sudden, it's clear two and a 
half miles, say, out of town or even further, they're plopping 
down an urban-type development. 

The neighbors who live in that area have larger sites 
— ten acres — have their own individual wells. 

On one of the developments in particular, there was 
not a good water study done. It proved that there was water for 
that development, but it did not take into consideration what 
would happen to the rest of the area, the neighbors in the area, 
for the water. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I see, very good. Thank you. 

MS. FAZEEL: Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Is there anyone else who wishes to 
testify? Yes, sir. 

MR. CAMPBELL: Good afternoon Members of the 
Committee. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Good afternoon, sir. 

MR. CAMPBELL: My name is Dick Campbell, and I'm a 
real estate broker from Fresno. I reside and work in Fresno 
County . 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



29 

I'm also a member of the Concerned Citizens for the 
Copra-San Joaquin area, which is an area that has approximately 
19 subdivisions in process in planning or have been approved by 
the County Board of Supervisors, an area where there's no water. 

I'm opposed to Mr. Conrad's nomination to this very 
important board. As a member of the Fresno County Board of 
Supervisors, he's consistently demonstrated his inability to 
fairly consider all aspects of a question and has flown in the 
face or reason and the law to vote for special interests. 

To illustrate, and I'm going to reiterate one of the 
points that the Senator made. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very well. 

MR. CAMPBELL: On March the 10th of this year, an 
appeal came before the Board of Supervisors concerning a 
development whose approval had been recommended denial primarily 
due to water concerns, but encompassing other environmental 
impacts. The recommended denials came from Fresno County 
Planning and Development staff, the Fresno County Public Works 
Department, Fresno City Planning staff and Public Works 
Department, the Fresno/Clovis Metropolitan Water Resources 
Management Plan, and the total opposition of people in the area. 

All of the above recommended denial, but stated that 
if approved, the preparation of an EIR was necessary. 

The Fresno County Planning Commission denied the 
project. Upon appeal by the developer, the Board of Supervisors 
approved the project by a three-to-two vote, with Mr. Conrad 
voting for approval, and denied the need, in face of CEQA, for 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



30 
an EIR, clearly a violation of the state law. 

It is especially important to note Mr. Conrad's 
thoughts on EIRs as he stated in seconding the motion to 
approve, and I quote verbatim from Page 13 of the official 
record of the hearing: 

"Well, Mr. Chairman, I'm going to 
second. And I think this matter of 
requiring an EIR is fine if you want 
to hassle people, create as much 
problems for him as you possibly 
can. I think that's one way of 
doing it. I think it's used almost 
on every project with that purpose 
in mind. " 
I do not think the Legislature passed the CEQA to 
hassle people. 

You see his thoughts already formed on the question 
of EIRs, which are required morally and legally when there's 
doubt. "They are used to hassle people." 

Members of the Committee, I beg you to deny this 
applicant's appointment, because he's obviously unqualified to 
serve all the parties' interests on such important issues as 
water, California's greatest resource. 

And I can submit in evidence a copy of the Board 
proceedings on March the 10th, and a copy of the official tape 
on which he made that statement, if it's required. 

I have one other thing. A man by the name of Radley 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



31 
Reep was due to come to testify, and he had a personal 
emergency, and he asked me to read a statement. It's very 
short . 

SENATOR CRAVEN: This is the statement of Radley 



Reep. 



MR. CAMPBELL: It says: 

"Dear Senator David Roberti, 

"Mr. Vernon Conrad has been a 
member of the Fresno County Board of 
Supervisors for a number of years. 
As a member of the Board, he 
exercises discretionary authority 
that is both broad and flexible. 
However, his discretionary authority 
is not without limitation. The 
State of California places upon his 
shoulders a fiduciary duty to see 
that the laws of the state are fully 
and fairly administered in the 
County of Fresno. 

"In 1985 I began to investigate 
environmental damage along Fresno 
County's river corridors. Over time 
I learned that the damage is largely 
the result of the failure of the 
County to adequately implement the 
Surface Mining and Reclamation Act 



32 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



and the California Environmental 
Quality Act, two of the state's 
outstanding environmental statutes. 
I have repeatedly brought the matter 
to the attention of the Fresno 
County Board of Supervisors, both 
collectively and individually. 
Vernon Conrad carries the 
distinction of being the only 
Supervisor to have declined to 
discuss the matter. Not good. 

"Failing to gain the 
cooperation of the County Board of 
Supervisors, I turned to the Office 
of the Attorney General for 
assistance. In a letter to Mr. Van 
de Kamp dated January 20, 1989, I 
stated the problem as follows: 'The 
responsibility for carrying the 
state's environmental mandate rests 
with local government .... On 
occasion, unfortunately, a local 
government may ignore state laws 
.... Such is the case with Fresno 
County . . . and the result has been 
harm to people and property .... 
Regulatory processes are in a stet 



33 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



of disarray . . . and it is clear that 
the root of the problem is the 
County's failure to comply with 
state laws. ' 

"I have studied the state's 
environmental statutes carefully. I 
am pleased with the body of 
environmental law the Legislature 
has provided the people of this 
state. But s you know, Senator 
Oberti [sic], the effectiveness of 
the state * s laws depend upon the 
willingness of the local officials 
to fully administer those laws. 

"Mr. Vernon Conrad is one of 
those officials. When asked his 
views on the County's administration 
of state laws, the Fresno Bee 
newspaper . . . . " — 
And I have a copy I'll submit, 

"... reported Mr. Conrad to have 
candidly replied, 'I am sure that 
Fresno County is adhering to the 
spirit of the law .... Whether it 
is within the letter of the law 
might be another thing. • 

"Since July 1990, operating 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



Namely, CEQA. 



34 
outside the letter of the law has 
caused residents of the County to 
file five environmental lawsuits 
against the Fresno County Board of 
Supervisors. I anticipate at least 
two additional suits before this 
year is out. Among other things, 
these suits allege abuse of 
discretion, illegality in 
proceedings and unreasonable, 
oppressive and unwarranted 
interference with the full and 
proper administration of state 
laws . " 

"The purpose of this letter is 
to inform the Senate Rules Committee 
of severe difficulties being 
experienced in Fresno County. 
Having observed Mr. Conrad for the 
past few years, it is my opinion 
that he has contributed 
unnecessarily to the difficulty. I 
cannot endorse Mr. Conrad for a 
position on the Regional Water 
Quality Control Board. I strongly 
recommend an exhaustive inquiry. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



35 
"Sincerely, Radley Reep." 
I'll submit this letter. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very well. The Sergeant will pick 
that up. 

MR. CAMPBELL: Any questions, please. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Any questions of Members of the 
Committee? There appear to be none. There may be some more in 
the audience. 

Thank you, Mr. Campbell, very much. 

Does anyone else in the audience wish to testify? 

Is Gary Langley in the audience? I had him listed. 

MR. CAMPBELL: Mr. Langley' s car broke down on the 
way up. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: That's unfortunate, in a way. 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I guess we have gone through that. 

Senator Petris, do you have any comments at all? 
Senator Mello? Senator Beverly? 

Do you want to make comments, Supervisor, to rebut 
some of the comments made? We can give you that opportunity if 
you choose. 

MR. CONRAD: Senator Craven, I think on my voting 
record, I would be glad to share with the Committee on all of 
the various issues. 

There are some folks here that are not my supporters. 
I can't understand that everyone doesn't love me, but they 
don't. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



36 

So, I don't think I'm going to go into that. But I 
will say that as far as any project, Fresno County has a policy 
that water has to be — significant water has to be determined 
before any project can go forward. There's a lengthy process 
that has to go through, and in some cases, an environmental, and 
in one other — two of the cases referred to here, the 
environmental record was not required until at a later date, 
when other things came into bearing. But that the environmental 
assessment and — would have been required in a couple of those 
cases, and I think these folks know that very well. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much. 

Do I have a motion? 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I'm prepared to make a motion, 
Mr. Chairman, but we have a short Committee. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: We can hold the roll open. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I move we recommend confirmation. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Beverly moves. Call the 
roll, please. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: No. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris No. 

Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



37 
Senator Robert i. 
SENATOR MELLO: Mello No. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Mello No. 
Two to two. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: We'll hold the roll open on this 
item. The vote is two -two. 

[Thereafter, Senator Mello' s motion 
for reconsideration was granted, and 
the appointment was held over until 
August 26. ] 
Thank you, Supervisor. 
Let's take ten minutes. 

[Thereupon a brief recess was taken. ] 
SENATOR CRAVEN: We'll resume the meeting of the 
Senate Rules Committee. 

Due to some logistical problems in the part of some 
people who wish to testify on the appointment of Camille 
Williams, Medical Doctor, Member of the California Medical 
Board, Division of Licensing, I'm going to ask that we deviate 
from the agenda as it's written and pick up that hearing at this 
time to allow these people to testify and get their planes and 
get back to where they came from. 

So if we may, let's have Dr. Williams come forward, 
and Dr. Williams is being considered for the California Medical 
Board, Division of Licensing. 

Doctor, please tell us why you feel you're qualified 
for this position. 



1 

2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



38 

DR. WILLIAMS: Distinguished Members of the Senate 
Rules Committee, it is a pleasure to appear before you. It is 
an honor to be nominated by the Governor and supported by 
numerous physicians, patients, and community leaders for my 
appointment to the Medical Board of California. 

With your support and confirmation, we will complete 
the goal of making certain that patients are given quality care. 

After working at St. Luke's Hospital in San Francisco 
as a nutritionist for low-income pregnant teenagers, my 
experience in medicine began in 1975, in the small town of La 
Ceiba, Honduras, where I served as a volunteer in the emergency 
room. Both my father and uncle were tailors. I had obtained an 
undergraduate degree in home economics from Oregon State 
University. I subsequently received my Master's Degree from the 
University of California at Davis in consumer science. 

When I arrived at the county hospital in La Ceiba, 
Honduras, my real usable skills were either in cooking or in 
sewing. Upon discovering that the kitchen was 90 degrees 
Farenheit by 7:00 o'clock in the morning, I chose to assist the 
surgeon in the emergency room. 

Thus, from the little girl who helped her father and 
uncle create fashions for big and tall men continued the 
evolution of the surgeon you see here today. 

I subsequently graduated from the University of 
California at San Francisco Medical School. After internship 
and general surgery training at the University of California at 
San Francisco, I completed a residency program at Kaiser 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



J9 
Hospital in head and neck surgery, including one year as Chief 
Resident. 

Through the Stanford University Interplast plastic 
surgery team, I was able to return to Honduras on three separate 
occasions as part of a volunteer plastic surgery team to a 
country that had only three plastic surgeons. Through the 
American Academy of Facial, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 
I was one of the few American surgeons to be honored to train 
with plastic surgeon Dr. Rudoulphe Meyer in Luzanne, 
Switzerland. Dr. Meyer is past president of the International 
Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons. 

I continued my training in Madrid, Spain, with 
plastic surgeon Aldofo Montoya, who had also been trained by one 
of the world's top plastic surgeons, Tessier of France, in 
craniofacial and reconstructive surgery. I had met 
Dr. Montoya when he was a Fellow at the University of California 
at San Francisco in the Department of Plastic Surgery. 

I'm a Graduate Fellow of the American Academy of 
Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, and an active member 
in a number of professional associations, including: the 
American Medical Association; the American Academy of Cosmetic 
Surgery; and the American Academy of Otolaryngology Head and 
Neck Surgery. I have co-authored and published several medical 
research articles in professional publications in the field of 
plastic surgery and head and neck surgery. 

I am also fluent in French and Spanish. 

During the past eight months, I have had the 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



40 
opportunity to address and to interface with organizations such 
as the Golden State Medical Association at their 25th 
anniversary convention, where I spoke about the future of 
medicine in the year 2000, in a world of shrinking governmental 
support and growing masses of needy people seeking primary care, 
particularly California's growing minority population. This 
community represents some 42 different languages and cultures 

I also had the opportunity to speak to the Sinkler- 
Miller Medical Association regarding the Medical Board of 
California, helping to educate this very important and 
prestigious Black professional organization to understand the 
role and the importance of the Medical Board of California to 
their practices and for their patients. 

I have been serving on the Medical Board's Division 
of Licensing. I and other members of the Division are 
responsible for setting medical education requirements and 
reviewing nonroutine license applications for physicians. 

The Board's licensing process is not a rubber stamp, 
but a form of preventative medicine to ensure all licensed 
physicians have adequate education and training. We issue 
licenses only to those physicians who meet California's high 
standards . 

Our specific goals are to determine that first-time 
applicants have had adequate medical education and accredited 
clinical training. We also determine that written and oral 
exams used are valid and also comprehensive. 

Physicians must keep up to date with continuing 



I 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



41 
education. It is the Division of Licensing' s responsibility to 
ensure that these courses that are taken by physicians are both 
valid and productive. The Division of Licensing does not 
oversee investigations, make disciplinary decisions, or oversee 
allied health professionals. 

Our mission is to ensure that physicians licensed to 
meet California's requirements, to guarantee that they are 
qualified to practice in our state. 

In addition to the Division of Licensing duties, I 
also serve on a number of subcommittees on the California 
Medical Board. Allow me to share with you some of the special 
committees that I have participated on during the eight months 
on which I have served the Medical Board of California. As I 
have tried to make the process more inclusionary in order to 
broaden the Medical Board's constituency with a high quality 
input of technical expertise for all specialities — expertise 
which has increased exponentially day-by-day as medicine rapidly 
expands it knowledge base. 

The Special Programs Committee of the Medical Board 
of California on which I serve reviews requests for postgraduate 
training through other than standard residency watch program as 
allowed by law. 

The intention of Non-physician Residency Training 
Programs Committee is to review standards and procedures which 
allows medical practice in the training setting. These two 
programs are critical to any future California government has in 
influencing non-mainstream populations into the profession. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



42 

The purpose of the Dental School Curriculum Review 
Committee on which I serve is to assess the standard dental 
school curriculum in view of an increase in requests to 
substitute it for medical undergraduate curriculum. 

The objective of the Surgeries in Unregulated 
Outpatient Settings Committee was to conduct two public hearings 
in order to receive comments from the public and interested 
private and public organizations on the public risks of 
surgeries in unregulated settings, and determine what further 
public protections are needed. 

I was privileged to be asked to draft the proposed 
regulations for the Committee on Unregulated Outpatient Settings 
after the chairman of that committee visited my surgery center 
in Orinda, which he described as a model center. 

While health care policy in our world is slowly 
coming into the Twentieth Century, California has the unique 
opportunity to take a leadership position. As one of the new 
generation of female physicians who has built a successful 
practice and business, my insights into the aforementioned 
principles would, I hope, be invaluable to the decision process 
needed. Perspective, balance, business acumen, and an unswerving 
demand for technical competence are the qualities which are 
called for in this arena. 

Your confirmation of my appointment will allow me the 
honor of continuing serve the public and helping promote and 
optimize the superb quality care inherent in our medical 
institutions and practitioners. 



43 

1 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you. 

Do any Members of the Committee wish to make a 
comment? Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: I'm happy; to say that she's from my 
district, but not my recent district, thanks to the 
reapportionment for the nicest part of the district. 

Over the years, we've had a problem with a conflict 
between the Board and the licensing part and foreign graduates. 
They seem to go in cycles, depending on where the political 
refugees are from, some of whom are doctors or medical students. 
And they have a difficult time establishing their credentials 
because the records aren't available. The most recent were the 
Vietnamese, and you're probably aware of the council that was 
set up to try to resolve that. 

DR. WILLIAMS: Yes. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Is that working out pretty well now? 
The complainants felt that it was overall very heavily biased 
against admission of doctors from other countries, and seemed to 
be particularly disturbing with respect to Asians. 

How is that council working out now? 

DR. WILLIAMS: That particular issue was resolved. 
It was resolved before I joined the Board. 

But I think all members of the Board recognize that 
we do have people in California that come from all over the 
world, and they deserve the same opportunities as those that are 
educated in California. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



44 

Our primary mission, though, is to protect the 
public, and one of the avenues that the Board has been looking 
at over a number of years is to, perhaps, add an extra course 
for those people who are trained in settings other than those 
that are approved by the Board, such as California and Canada. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Is that the 1324 category? 

DR. WILLIAMS: Yes. 

SENATOR PETRIS: In that connection, it's been 
suggested that one of the Board members has a conflict because 
he operates one of those programs, the 1324, and at the same 
time, he's making important decisions on the Board relating to 
that group. 

Have you observed any of that? 

DR. WILLIAMS: No, I haven't. Anything that I've at 
in on that I think you're speaking of, Dr. Ryder, he has excused 
himself from voting on anything that he felt would be in direct 
conflict. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Is that a consistent policy of his? 

DR. WILLIAMS: That's what I've seen since I've been 
on the Board, yes. 

SENATOR PETRIS: There's nothing left since that much 
time has passed relating to the Vietnamese. 

DR. WILLIAMS: I think that's been settled, yes. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Let's go to the audience and see if 
there is someone who wishes to speak in favor of this appointee, 
please come up and do so. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



45 

DR. TOBIN: Senator Craven, my name is Howard Tobin. 
I'm honored to be here amongst you Senators. I wish I could 
speak as well as Dr. Williams. 

I'm a practicing plastic surgeon in Abilene, Texas. 
When I was coming down to speak on behalf of Dr. Williams, I 
consulted with a friend of mine on how I'd talk to such an 
august body. He said, "Don't tell them you're a Texan. The 
last thing those Californians want is a Texan coming down and 
telling them how to run their affairs." 

Then I called on Senator Grant Jones, one of the most 
distinguished gentlemen in the Texas Senate. I said, "Grant, 
I'm going to talk to some Senators in California. I don't know 
how to address them." He said, "Howard, tell them the truth." 
He said, "If they ask you any questions, answer them 
truthfully." 

Well, that's what I'll do, Senators. 

Let me introduce myself. I'm the President-elect 
and current Vice President of the American Academy of Plastic 
Surgeons, which consists of 1400 member groups and educational 
organizations that's primarily focusing on education in cosmetic 
surgery. I also serve on the Doard of Directors of 
Accreditationary Ambulatory Health Care, the nation's largest 
outpatient accrediting organization. I also serve on the 
Stanford Surgery Procedure of that organization. Finally, I 
served as representative of the American Medical Association to 
the Department of Food and Drug Administration. 

Camille Williams was a Fellow of the American 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



46 
Cosmetic Surgery. I endorse her just on that basis, but I know 
a lot more about Cam i lie, and I can endorse her on a much more 
personal basis. 

Camille has already told you a little bit about her 
background. I don't know if she conveyed how hard she's worked 
to overcome a disadvantaged environment to bring herself up and 
educate herself, and become the type of surgeon that she is now. 
She's indeed a very remarkable individual. 

Camille contacted me several years ago and asked to 
come spend some time in my clinic to learn some procedures in 
cosmetic surgery. She came down and observed. She was a very 
diligent student, very wise. She had a lot of good ideas. An 
interesting thing happened while Camille was down studying with 
me. A Black lady who had been a patient of mine came to my 
clinic and saw Camille standing by and starting talking about 
her problem. Camille said, "Why don't you try it this way?" I 
remember that, Camille, because I did try it that way and I got 
a wonderful result. I learned from Camille. 

So, Camille has a lot to offer. She has done a 
wonderful job in both learning and educating. She's consulted 
with me on a number of occasions, and I found that her interest 
in the patient goes beyond what would be considered the norm. 
She's greatly concerned about her patients, dedicated to 
learning, and she's dedicated to knowledge. 

I can assure you, Senators, if she's re-appointed to 
this Board, she will not only be a credit to the Board, but 
she'll be a credit to your selection, and a credit to the 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



47 
citizens of California. 

Thank you very much. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you, Doctor, very much. We 
appreciate your being here. 

Anyone else who wishes to speak? Yes, sir. 

DR. BOOKER: Distinguished Senators of the Rules 
Committee, I'm Jim Booker, a physician and surgeon from Southern 
California. I practice in Torrance, California. 

I've been knowing Dr. Williams for many years. I 
have a unique experience with Dr. Williams that I think is 
worthy of this Committee's being aware of. 

I had the pleasure of being appointed to proctor 
Dr. Williams when she first came to practice, and that's when I 
first met her. And at the time, I did not know her, which 
enabled me to be very objective in this process. The reason 
that I was chosen to do that is because of my experience in 
medical administration and the fact that objectivity is 
certainly required in the proctor ing process. 

I was pleasantly surprised to find someone so 
competent and who was yet so young in the field. I was so 
pleasantly surprised that it was a pleasure to carry out this 
process on behalf of the hospital. 

At the end of the proctor ing period, without any 
reservations whatsoever, I took great pride in recommending that 
Dr. Williams be allowed to perform the surgical procedures that 
she had applied for and had done with my observation without any 
further supervision. I felt very good about that. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



48 

In addition, we became quite close in our 
professional and personal relationship, and I worked with her in 
several other cases thereafter, and I found her to be one of he 
best surgeons I • ve ever worked with , and I • ve worked with many 
over the years throughout the world. 

I find that today, after having moved to another 
area, she still stands out as being one of the best that I've 
eve worked with. 

In addition to that, as a person, she is one of the 
most caring persons I've ever met. I think that she pays 
attention to detail. 

And for all the reasons foregoing that you heard from 
others and myself and from her, I believe that she would serve 
this Committee very well in the capacity that she has been 
appointed. I certainly would like to recommend her 
unequivocally for any job that the Board or this body would 
recommend her for. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you, Doctor, very much. 

Anyone else who wishes to testify? Yes, sir. 

MR. CARTER: I'm not a doctor. My name is Gary 
Carter, and I'm here to speak on behalf of Camille Williams. 

I'm in favor of her installation on the Medical Board 
of California. 

As a fifth generation Californian, civic 
responsibility has always been a rich part of my family history. 
We have founded towns, built churches, and most recently donated 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



49 
a thousand acres on the Sacramento River as a state park. 

I only give this oration so you understand that if I 
did not believe in Dr. Williams's superior skills and manner, I 
would not be standing before you. 

Dr. Williams's skill and aptitude are a personal 
experience for me, an experience that exceeded my expectation. 
At all times I felt I was kept informed, had only minor 
discomfort; the scar is barely visible. 

My face was skewered by cut bamboo in my own backyard 
when I fell. As I fell, my cheek was ripped; my lip torn, and 
my — the roof of my mouth was severely gouged. This happened 
on a Saturday evening. My wife was able to get hold of Dr. 
Williams. We met at her facility. She sutured me on that 
outside, the inside, all the way through my cheek and lip. 

None of the stitches puckered or pulled the skin. I 
was impressed on the workmanship. As soon as I looked at it, my 
shirt isn't sewed that nice. 

[ Laughter . ] 

MR. CARTER: I've been blessed that I have been able 
to live a very physically active life, and many of those 
activities have had their risk, and I've had a number of 
different experiences with stitches. And in my judgment, I feel 
that Dr. Williams has a skill, has — and has a manner that are 
far superior to any that I've encountered. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much. 

Yes, sir. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



50 

DR. SCHOENROCK: I'm Larry Schoenrock, and I won't 
bore you with additional credentials as it relates to my 
position as a physician, other than to tell you that I direct 
the Division of Facial and Plastic Surgery at the University of 
California at San Francisco. 

I've known Camille for a long period of time, and 
first met her when she was in a residency. I also knew her when 
she was applying for a fellowship, and I've been able to follow 
her career. 

I've also been on one of the divisional sections of 
the Medical Board, and so I have a sensitivity to the issues 
that the Medical Board deals with. 

In this era of really multiple conflicts, concerns 
about peer conflicts, concerns about many of the other aspects 
of cosmetic surgery, concerns with many of the other aspects of 
credentialing and licensure, I think Camille brings an 
additional avenue, if you will, and an additional multiple 
segment of viewpoints that the Medical Board badly needs. I 
think that in this regard, everybody else has spoken for her 
abilities; I certainly support that. But I also would like to 
emphasize the fact that she is going to be another voice that 
the Medical Board badly needs in licensure, and she is going to 
be able to deal with some of the conflicts and bring the 
information to the Medical Board that they need, particularly 
those as it relates to outpatient surgical units, as it relates 
to the conflicts in cosmetic and plastic surgery. And in this 
regard, I support Camille. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



51 

Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you, Doctor. 

Anyone else? 

MS. CAMPBELL: My name is Carol Campbell. I'm 
residing in Marin County. 

I am speaking on behalf of Dr. Williams because I 
first looked into cosmetic surgery because a friend of mine's 
child was badly damaged, went to a hospital, and had emergency 
irelief . It was not a plastic surgeon, and so, because I have 
two beautiful little girls, I said I need to find out who's the 
best. 

I wanted to know what the education was, what status 
they had as an M.D., how much training they had had, what kind 
of specialized training they had had, where they got their 
training, whether or not it was just cosmetic, were there other 
surgery abilities; whether or not there was critical care 
treatment available by the person that I would decide who would, 
in the event my children were hurt, I would select. 

Dr. Williams was that person. From that, in learning 
about her credentials, I am ten years older than my husband, and 
decided that I would look into it a little further. 

[Laughter. ] 

MS. CAMPBELL: I had one eyebrow that was sagging a 
bit, and so on. I got my eyes lifted by Dr. Williams, and in 
the process of that, I went into her office and I found out all 
about her because I observed not only the fact that she doesn't 
pull a string from things, she cuts it with the scissors. She 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



52 
has tremendously capable staff in that she talks to you fully. 
That begins with what happens, when, where, what kind of 
anesthetic you might use, what you're going to feel like 
beforehand, what you're going to feel like afterwards, what the 
alternatives are, how you can — how you might feel, whether or 
not you're going to be affected for a length of time. 

When you have been, as I have been, a beauty queen, 
you are really concerned about — especially if — I came from a 
dysfunctional home. And in coming from dysfunctional home, I 
learned that my looks got me a lot of places. And I did not 
have the help of anyone else, and so therefore, I wanted to be 
sure that — when you have someone cutting on your face, you 
want to be sure that they're going to do the right job. 

And I learned that Dr. Camille Williams is not only 
meticulous, but she's a perfectionist in every aspect that she 
gets involved in, and has a great deal of clarity in her 
decision making and in helping others to make their decisions. 

So, I highly recommend her. Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much. 

Is there someone else? There's a lady. 

MS. SANKARY: Hi, my name is Kiyoni Sankary, and my 
daughter, Miki Sankary. 

It was one year ago she fell down by our garage, and 
she got big deep cut in left eyebrow. And we called Dr. 
Williams, and she said she would see her immediately. 

So, we took her to Dr. Williams's office, and she was 
so nice, and Miki calmed down. And she was about a year and a 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



53 
half. 

And while surgery, she was — she didn't cry. She 
went to sleep. So, Dr. Williams did four stitches for her. 

Then after that, even though when we had to take out 
stitches, we took her to Dr. Williams's office, but Miki didn't 
afraid of anything. 

So this little baby, she doesn't know anything right 
now, but she will really appreciate that Dr. Williams wonderful 
job for my daughter. 

And you couldn't see what scar, four stitches. So, 
thank you, Dr. Williams. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good, thank you, dear, very 



much. 



MIKI SANKARY: Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Now, that's a real act if I've ever 



seen one. 



[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: It's going to be hard to top that. 

Is there anyone else who wishes to comment? We have 
a gentleman coming forward here. 

DR. WASHINGTON: I'm Robert Washington, your Honor. 
I worked with Dr. Camille Williams in the capacity of 
anesthetizing her patients. 

I found — I've worked with plastic surgeons in the 
past, and eye doctors, and general surgeons. And I find Dr. 
Williams very meticulous in her preparation of patients, in her 
communication with patients, and her overall discerning ability 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



54 
of what is best for the patient. 

I think Dr. Williams is a very highly moral and 
Christian person that's concerned about others. And so, I 
recommend that Dr. Camille Williams be seriously considered and 
voted yes to be on the Board of Licensure. 

Thank you very much. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much, sir. 

Anyone else who wishes to speak in favor? Yes, 
ma ' am . 

MS. SMITH: I've been in the glamour field for about 
30 years, sending many beauty queens and models to have things 
done to their faces and their figures, et cetera. But I sort of 
avoided myself. 

For the last year, I've been searching for somebody 
that made me feel good about having my face done. After being 
in her office for five minutes, and I'm from Southern California 
— all the doctors I interviewed were down there. After five 
minutes in her office, I decided that she was the one, because 
she was very caring, and very articulate, and I'm real happy. 

I've had my surgery only five weeks, and I think I 
look pretty darn good for a 70-year old! 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I think you do, too. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Question. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Petris has a comment. 

SENATOR PETRIS: It was a question. She's way back 
there. Maybe she can just nod yes or no. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



55 

She probably didn't get a good look at me. I don't 

know if there's any hope for me. 

[ Laughter . ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Let me tell you, to just kind of add 

a touch, if it's any solace to you, you look very good to me, 

and I'm 71 years old. 

[Laughter. ] 

MS. GOODMAN: Hello, my name is Earline Goodman. I'm 

from Memphis, Tennessee. 
I 

And I needed surgery, and Dr. Camille Williams was 

recommended, and I flew out, and I was very, very satisfied. I 

tell you, it's changed my life for better. 

She's a warm, caring person. She makes you feel — 
she has the knack of making you feel very comfortable. 

I'm very nervous now. 

I am so proud of her, and I'm glad to be here. And 
you can't — there's no way you could find a better person, or 
select a better person for the Medical Board. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much. Did you come 
all the way from Memphis? 

MS. GOODMAN: I decided to stay after I got here. 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Yes, sir. 

DR. STANTEN: My name is Dr. Steve Stanten. There's 
some tough acts to follow here. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: There are. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



56 

DR. STANTEN: Mine's going to be very short. 

I've known Camille Williams since our days as 
residents together at Kaiser Hospital, and residents share a 
certain kind of bond and a certain work ethic during the long, 
long hours during residency. And at that time, Camille and I 
became close friends. 

Now we're in practice in the same area, both in 
private practice, and I've worked with her on many occasions and 
have enjoyed continuing our friendship. 

And I can strongly recommend Camille both on a 
personal and medical basis for this position. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Fine, thank you, Doctor, very much. 

Is there anyone else that wishes to speak in favor? 

Anyone in opposition? 

SENATOR PETRIS: Question. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Question, Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: When were you at the U.C. Medical, 
San Francisco? 

DR. WILLIAMS: I'm in the class of '80. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Doctor, you have had some ringing 
endorsements; there's no question about that, and I think we're 
all very much impressed by your background and resume. It is 
nice to have people so supportive. You've established yourself 
quite well, to say the least. 

SENATOR PETRIS: I'd like to make the motion, but I 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



57 
also have one more question. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Certainly. 

SENATOR PETRIS: This overflow of good will toward 
you and your caring raises one question. 

Can you be tough enough on the Board to go after some 
of your colleagues if it's necessary? 

DR. WILLIAMS: I think it's an honor to serve the 
people of California, and that's the trust that I wish to 

maintain. 

i 

SENATOR PETRIS: But can you do it? 
DR. WILLIAMS: Yes. 

SENATOR PETRIS: I thought somebody that sweet would 
have difficulty. 

[Laughter. ] 
SENATOR PETRIS: I move confirmation, Mr. Chairman. 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Is that the velvet glove on the iron 



fist? 



please. 



Very good, Senator Petris has moved. Call the roll, 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 
SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 
Senator Mello. 
SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 
Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



58 
SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 
Senator Craven. 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 
Senator Robert i. 
Four to zero. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Measure's out four-zero to the 
Floor. 

Thank you, Doctor, very much. Congratulations. 
[Thereupon the final vote for 
confirmation was 5-0, as Senator 
Roberti • s aye vote was added 
pursuant to Senate Rule 28.7] 
[Thereupon the Senate Rules 
Committee acted upon legislative 
agenda items . ] 
SENATOR CRAVEN: May we now go back to the 
appointees. Next is William Duncan II, Warden, California Mens 
Colony. 

Good afternoon, Mr. Duncan. Would you tell us, 
please, a little bit about your background, why you feel that 
you're qualified for this position. 

MR. DUNCAN: Mr. Chairman and distinguished Members, 
my name is Bill Duncan, and I was appointed as the Warden of the 
California Mens Colony on December 30th of last year. 

I'm a career Department of Corrections employee with 
approximately 22 years of state service. I began my career as a 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



59 
correctional officer at Deuel Vocational Institution in 1970, 
and subsequently promoted through all the supervisory and 
managerial ranks within the Department. I have been employed at 
five separate and distinct prisons, encompassing virtually every 
level of classification of inmate, both male and female. 

I have over 16 years of supervisory experience, and 
approximately 12 years of managerial experience. I've served in 
a multitude of staff assignments at the Department level, 
including membership on a task force to develop curriculum for 
the Correctional Training Academy, Disturbance Control 
Coordinator, as instructor for management development, and last 
year, member of the management bargaining team in negotiations 
with the California Correctional Peace Officers Association. 

I fully support the Department's mission to protect 
public safety, offer viable programs to assist inmates in their 
return to society as more productive citizens, educate the 
public pertaining to the role of correctional programming, and 
managing the system in a fiscally responsible manner. 

I believe, based upon my tenure at the Department and 
my multifaceted level of experience that I can best serve the 
state and public by utilizing my knowledge, skills, and ability 
to manage and direct a difficult, complex prison operation. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very well, thank you. 

Any Members of the Committee wish to comment at this 
time? 

Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak 
in support of the appointee? 



1 

2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



60 

You must have told them all to stay home. 

Anyone who wishes to speak in objection? There 
appears to be none. 

I should tell you also that the Association of Black 
Correctional Officers, Leon Ralph's outfit, have been supportive 
of all of these Warden candidates. I want to make that clear 
for the record. Leon couldn't be here — oh, there he is; I'm 
sorry . 

Do you want to come up, Leon, and say something? 

MR. RALPH: Mr. Chairman, Members, thank you so much 
for your courtesy. 

I'm here representing the Association of Black 
Correctional Workers. We're here in support of Mr. Duncan and 
all of the appointees for Warden today, as was the case in the 
previous two weeks. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good. 

MR. RALPH: Thank you for your courtesy. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you, sir. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Move we recommend confirmation. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Beverly moves. Call the 



roll 



SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 
SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 
Senator Mello. 
SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 



13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 

">"» 

23 
24 

25 
26 

27 



61 

Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 

Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

Senator Roberti. 

Four to zero. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good, congratulations. 

MR. DUNCAN: Thank you very much. 

[Thereupon the final vote for 
confirmation was 5-0, as Senator 
Roberti • s aye vote was added 
pursuant to Senate Rule 28.7] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Next is Ivalee C.H. Henry, Warden, 
Mule Creek State Prison. 

MS. HENRY: Hello. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Good afternoon. Tell us why you 
feel you're qualified. 

MS. HENRY: Mr. Chairman and Senators, I, like Mr. 
Duncan, have been a career employee of the Department of 
Corrections. My experience began in San Quentin in 1961, so, 
unlike his basic 17 years, I have 3 years of experience with 
the Department. 

I have had the privilege of working throughout the 
State of California. I've worked at all different levels of 
supervisory classifications and management classifications. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



62 
I've also had the opportunity of working in all of the 
operational divisions within the Department, which includes 
prisons. I've worked for three prisons. I've also worked with 
the Parole Operations; I have worked with Prison Industries as a 
manager; I've also worked in the administrative services as a 
branch chief, and then in headquarters operation in the 
Department of Corrections, having statewide program 
responsibility. 

I have a professional philosophy in terms of 
accepting the responsibility for a Warden, which is that a 
Warden is not only responsible for the safety of the public, but 
is also responsible for creating a working environment that is 
safe for our employees, that is also — that should be also safe 
for our inmates to do their time. And in creating that kind of 
environment, it takes a great deal of leadership, strong 
leadership. 

It is my belief that in order to create that safety 
factor that inmates need to be programmed. I am a very strong 
supporter of our education program, which is complete in terms 
of academic and vocational. I am also in very strong support of 
the literacy program. We also have a number of self-help 
programs that I think is important for inmates to enhance their 
abilities, not only so that they do good time, but because that 
will also enhance their success in their transition back to our 
communities. And that is one thing that I think we all, and as 
a Warden I accept some responsibility for, know that our inmates 
will be returning to our communities. 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



63 
As a Warden, I also believe that it is important to 

be a good neighbor. And prison should be an asset to a 

I 

community, and it is my commitment and my intent, and since I've 

been at Mule Creek Prison, to do that. 

The prison that I'm in charge of is a high medium 
level prison. They have over 3600 inmates and 931 staff. It is 
a very responsible job. It is one that I take very seriously. 

And in my decision to consider being a Warden for the 
Department of Corrections and for the State of California, it 
took a great deal of deliberation on my part. 

So, I accept this responsibility with a great deal of 
commitment. I also feel very strongly as a public administrator 
in providing the people of California the highest level of 
integrity and loyalty. 

And I believe that with my background and experience 
with the Department of Corrections, my personal commitment, that 
I'd be a very good Warden . 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you. 

Do any Members of the Committee have any comments at 
this time? Question, Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Where is Mule Creek? 

MS. HENRY: I knew somebody 'd ask me. It's in lone 
in Amador County, Senator Johnston's area. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Do we have two Iones in the state? 

MS. HENRY: Not that I know of. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Only Bob Monagan's wife, whose name 
lis lone. 



2 

! 

3 



64 
Anyone who wishes to speak in support of this 
candidacy, appointment? Yes, ma'am; please come forward and 
state your name. 



4 

MS. VASQUEZ: Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. 

5 

My name is Hope Vasquez, and I'm here today on behalf of the 

6 

National Mexican-American Correctional Association. 

I just want to voice our support with Ivalee. We 

8 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 



19 

20 
21 

22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 



have worked with her over the years regarding Hispanic issues, 

land we hope to continue the working relationship, and we're here 

i 

I today again of support of her appointment. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much, Ms. Vasquez. 

Anyone else who wishes to comment? 

MR. RALPH: Mr. Chairman, I want to make sure the 
record reflects that the Association of Black Correctional 
Workers do support all the Wardens today. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much, Leon. 

MS. McKINNEY: My name is Donna McKinney, and I'm the 
President of Women in Criminal Justice. 

We're also in support of Ms. Henry's nomination. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much. We appreciate 



it. 



Anyone else? 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Move we recommend confirmation. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Beverly moves. 

Let me ask you just one question. Where were you 



born? 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



65 

MS. HENRY: Hilo, Hawaii. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Oh, my old home. 

MS. HENRY: Really? 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Yes. Probably — well, you were 
just a little girl when I was there. 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I was there right after Kamehameha 
left. 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: You were about four or five years 
old. How time flies. 

MS. HENRY: Yes. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Well, I saw here that you a member 
of the Asian-Pacific Islanders State Employees Association, and 
I just wanted to you from whence you came so you qualified for 
that. 

MS. HENRY: Yes, I do. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: It's nice to see a wahine again. 

MS. HENRY: Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Call the roll, please. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 

Senator Petris. 



66 
I 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 
2 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 
3 

Senator Craven. 

4 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 
5 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

6 

Senator Roberti. 

7 

Four to zero. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Four-zero; congratulations. 
9 

MS. HENRY: Thank you very much. 



8 



10 

H | 
12 

,3 ! 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 j 

27 

28 1 



[Thereupon the final vote for 
confirmation was 5-0, as Senator 
Roberti' s aye vote was added 
pursuant to Senate Rule 28.7] 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Next is George E. Ingle, Warden, 
California Medical Facility. 

Mr. Ingle, if you will, please, tell us why you're 
qualified for this position. 

MR. INGLE: I'd like to thank the Members of the 
Board for the opportunity to appear before the Committee. 

My background includes 28 years in the field of 
Corrections, starting in 1964 as a correctional officer. I 
promoted through the ranks, serving in 12 different civil 
service classifications. I have served at seven different 
correctional institutions and with the Parole and Community 
Services Division. 

My experience and assignments include both a wide 
variety of field operations and staff assignments in Corrections 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



67 
headquarters. While in CDC's Central Office, I served in the 
capacity of Chief of Classification and as Assistant Deputy 
Director, Institutions Division, with responsibility for 
statewide policy development and policy compliance. 

During my prior assignment as Warden of Mule Creek 
State Prison, some of my major accomplishments included: 
activation of the new prison; successfully overcrowding the 
prison to 225 percent of capacity; development and 

I! 

implementation of new vocational educational and prison 
industries programs. 

This varied background with a wide range of 

correctional experience has prepared me for the position of 

i] 

Warden at the California Medical Facility. 

Due to the notoriety at CMF and some recent concerns, 
I would like to share with the Committee a brief overview of the 
multi-program mission of the California Medical Facility, and 
some of the major issues we, as an organization, are working on. 

The institution offers a comprehensive program of 

i. 

psychiatric and medical care. It contains an 150-bed acute 
inpatient psychiatric hospital, a 943-bed outpatient psychiatric 
program, a 65-bed licensed medical hospital, and a 482-bed HIV 
center. 

Although CMF is a Level III facility, medium 
security, inmates within any custody level may be housed there 
consistent with their treatment needs. This institution has 
been designated to house and treat the violent and management 
psychiatric inmates, the high custody, and complex medical 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



68 
cases, and the more debilitated AIDS inmates. 

As Warden, I administer a difficult balancing act to 
ensure that the very best medical and psychiatric care is 
provided to the inmate population, while providing a safe and 
secure environment for both the staff and inmates to work and 

live. 

i 

Competing requirements often require innovative 

I 

correctional and medical decisions, and sometimes involve 
decisions which are not popular or fully understood by medical 
or custody staff and/or the inmates. In making decisions, I 
consult all disciplines and try to reach consensus where 

possible. 

j 

The institution has been under close scrutiny for 
several years due to two ongoing lawsuits. The first was filed 
in 1985 by the federal government under the Civil Rights of 
Institutionalized Persons Act, commonly referred to as CRIPA, 
for not providing timely medical, dental, and psychiatric care. 
As a result of that action, the Department of Corrections and 
CMF entered into a Consent Decree. Based on substantial 
compliance during the subsequent reviews by the Department's 
Inspector General's Office and the CRIPA consultants, the 
federal government dismissed the medical and dental provisions 
of the Consent Decree in July of this year. 

The second lawsuit, filed in 1988, CRIPA vs. 
Deukmeiian . is a class action suit alleging inadequate medical 
and psychiatric care, lack of provisions for disabled inmates, 
restrictive programming for AIDS inmates, and general conditions 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



69 
of confinement. The Department and the institution also entered 
into a Consent Decree in this case, and a Special Master was 
appointed to provide oversight of this Decree. 

In most areas there has been substantial compliance 
with the Consent Decree, with the exception of mental health. 

In reviewing the mission and programs at CMF, 
including the Consent Decrees, I have concentrated the 
institutional resources on the mental health programs, the HIV 
programs, and the recruitment of clinical leadership. In April 
of 1992, recognizing the low compliance level with the 
outpatient psychiatric program, the Department assisted in 
developing an implementation team comprised of professionals 
throughout CDC. Their task was to review the program, identify 
the needed resources, and assist CMF staff in implementing the 
program. 

Monthly meetings have been established with the 
plaintiffs, the court consultants, the United States Department 
of Justice experts, the implementation team, and CMF staff. The 
compliance ratings have steadily improved. As a result of some 
reorganization of the program, improvement of the policies and 
procedures, and staff training, the program is now moving toward 
compliance. 

In terms of the HIV program, the Department in 1991 
approved a budget change proposal to transfer — to establish an 
HIV center for 482 inmates. The goal of the program is to 
establish comprehensive medical, nursing, psychological care, 
and expanded programming within a custody setting for identified 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



70 
HIV positive inmates. The new location provides for more 
programming and recreation activities, and has been centralized 
for improved delivery of medical services. 

When the budget is approved, the budget change 
proposal will provide for increased clinical, educational and 
custodial staffing, which will further enhance the program. 

A proposal has been submitted to restructure the 
outpatient psychiatric program to provide for increased 
supervision and management. Currently, civil service testing 
has been scheduled for the Medical Director and Chief 
Psychiatrist. In conjunction with CDC headquarters, extensive 
nationwide recruiting has been conducted to attract the very 
best candidates. 

Finally, I would like to address four areas — four 
other areas of my personal involvement to provide improved 
services to the inmate population. 

I have assisted the Director in streamlining the 
Compassionate Release program for terminally ill inmates. At 
CMF, when a clinician identifies an inmate that medically 
qualifies for consideration, the case is immediately reviewed by 
me for policy compliance and then submitted to the Director for 
a decision. 

Early on, following my appointment as Warden at CMF, 
I became aware of the significant recruitment and retention 
problems of medical and psychiatric staff. I addressed this 
issue with the Director, and through the collective bargaining 
process, an enhanced recruitment and retention stipend was 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



71 
agreed to pending budget approval. 

As a result of the establishment of the HIV center, I 
requested through the Director to move the capital outlay budget 
change proposal for enhancing the HIV center, which included 
electrical upgrade, pharmacy, and the hospice unit from the 
1993-4 to current year. 

And since the cells that the HIV inmates were 
relocated to in July of this year did not have electrical 
outlets, I developed a short-term fix for the installation of 
electrical outlets. That project should be completed within six 
to eight weeks. 

The HIV center is a new program in concept awaiting 
budget approval; however, daily the staff and inmates are 
working to improve the operation and provide for the best 
medical and psychiatric care available. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good, thank you very much, sir. 
That's quite extensive and very interesting as well. 

Any Members of the Committee wish to make comment at 
this time? 

Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to 
testify on behalf of the appointee? 

MR. RALPH: Mr. Chairman, we would like to stipulate 
that the Association of Black Correctional Workers support this 
nomination, and ask that you confirm. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very well. 

Anyone else who wishes to speak in favor? 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



72 

MS. McKINNEY: Donna McKinney, President, Women in 
Criminal Justice. 

I believe we have a letter on file in support of 
Mr. Ingle. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Yes. 

Where are you headquartered? 

MS. McKINNEY: I work at the California State Prison 
at Solano. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I see, thank you very much. 

Anyone else? 

I had some others listed here, Jim Lewis. 

How about in opposition? Do we have anyone in 
opposition? We have a listing of, well, an individual. You 
certainly would qualify under that guise. 

Yes, sir. State your name, please. 

MR. RIOS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members. 

Robert Rios with the LIFE AIDS Lobby. 

We have submitted a record in opposition to the 
confirmation of Mr. Ingle based on some information that has 
been presented to us about administrative policies dealing with 
inmates with HIV, and there will be some subsequent testimony 
about those issues. 

I want to emphasize that the LIFE AIDS Lobby has a 
firm commitment to working with the administration and the 
communities involved to come up with a satisfactory resolution 
to those issues that will be raised later. 

Thank you. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



73 

SENATOR CRAVEN: You're entirely welcome. 

Is there someone else who wishes to — yes, sir. 
Come forward and state your name, please. 

MR. LEWIS: Yes, good afternoon. 

My name is Jim Lewis, and I represent several 
California chapters of ACT UP and CHAIN, C-H-A-I-N, which is the 
California HIV Activists and Inmate Network. 

It is a bit embarrassing for me to address a 
Committee comprised of five of the most powerful men in the 
State of California on behalf of some of the least powerful men 
in the State of California, namely prisoners with AIDS in this 
kinder, gentler, and ever more medieval nation. 

I'm a bit nervous, so excuse me, please. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Just settle down, Jim. There's no 
reason to feel nervous. We're happy to have you. 

MR. LEWIS: Thank you, Senator Craven. 

The reality of the epidemic in prisons is something 
extremely serious. It is very likely that as we speak right 
now, someone is dying at CMF of AIDS. Two or three people, on 
the average, die there every week. 

By 1995, there may be a thousand men there with 
symptomatic HIV disease. This would make it the largest 
hospital in California, and the largest HIV population in the 
world. One person at that time would probably die every day 
after six months of disability, at least. And no matter what 
this Committee does today, that is going to be true. With the 
number of men with the HIV in the intravenous drug-user 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



74 
population and the underclass, this is going to happen. 

And we have not seen anything like a plan that is 
going to address this coming crisis, which is already a crisis. 

I ask you to think for a moment — it isn't as 
enjoyable as the last testimony was — but to think for a moment 
what it might be like to die of AIDS at CMF. Many AIDS patients 
go blind before they die. Before they die, they are not able to 
feed themselves; they cannot walk to the commode; they cannot 
even raise a glass of water for the thirst of the dying. This 
is something we will all go through, and these men are presently 
going through it alone. 

However, this crisis has brought out the best in many 
people. I had the privilege of meeting Dr. Maisonet some months 
ago, who some call the Mother Theresa of Northern California, 
and he, of course, was asked to present at the eighth 
International AIDS Congress in Amsterdam last month. This man 
was so tired when I met him, that he sat down in his chair and 
fell asleep while talking at 4:30 in the afternoon. It was 
probably the first time he'd sat down all day. The 
extraordinary thing was, even while fast asleep, he was able to 
continue talking. 

[Laughter. ] 

MR. LEWIS: I was also privileged to see Pastoral 
Care Services, which is an inmate group organized by the inmates 
and Father Leslie, whose pledge was that no inmate would have to 
die alone. It seems like a modest enough goal, except at CMF. 
Thirty prisoners, half of whom were HIV-positive, held the hands 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



75 

of the dying, gave them water and food, in this most fearful 
time that will come to us all. They got no work credit. They 
missed their sleep in order to do this, which compromised their 
own health. 

So, this was what I saw. 

Now, I understand that Mr. Ingle comes very highly 
recommended, that he is a dedicated public servant. But since 
he has arrived at CMF, either by design or neglect, so many of 
these things that were created there have fallen into 
disrepair. 

In the many letters that you have in regard to this 
matter, there is one from Michael Haggerty, who was the 
organizer of the Pastoral Care Service, which was that peer 
group thing that I just described. He describes what happened, 
by his objectives; the observation of he, who was an inmate 
there under the old Warden and the new Warden when Mr. Ingle 
came into office. Quote: 

"Warden Ingle . . . appointed an 
openly hostile Associate Warden, 
Carolyn Graham and . . . allowed her 
to operate without adequate 
supervision. As a result the three 
pre-eminent physicians left CMF and 
the CDC rather than be forced to 
compromise their medical ethics. 
The support staffs were severely 
impacted by this departure, and 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



76 
patient care and services began a 
constant, and increasingly rapid 
decline in quality and delivery 
time. PCS was almost entirely 
eliminated. " 
That is the peer counseling group. 

"The only reason it was not, is that 
it enjoys a substantial body of 
community-based support, which 
loudly voiced concerns over the 
situation. " 
Many people on this Committee have said, "What's all 
the trouble about? We thought this was a routine appointment." 

This is what the trouble is all about. In the few 
instances when a few people rose up to take care of this crisis, 
which was growing into unimaginable proportions, they were 
knocked down. Whose fault it is, is hard to say, but it 
happened under this gentleman's watch. 

So, I can only go on to say that Drs. Maisonet, Clark 
and Diamond were replaced by doctors who admittedly, by their 
own admission, know very little about HIV. One of them is a 
pediatric neurologist. 

Dr. Jessica Clark is testifying under subpoena this 
afternoon in federal court in regard to the issue of trying to 
put two men into a five-by-nine foot pocket cell. That's five 
feet by nine feet, in which two men with AIDS can share their 45 
square feet, and every opportunistic infection that they might 



77 

1 

have. This is absolutely unacceptable. 

There are other complaints in our written testimony 



5 ! 



6 

7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



and that of the many organizations that have worked together to 
oppose this nomination. 

Is it fair to blame all of this on Mr. Ingle? 
Probably not, but the buck has to stop somewhere. Perhaps it 
was a poor appointment by the CDC, but clearly, anyone who's 
going to run what is going to become the largest AIDS hospital 
in the world should have some knowledge of epidemiology, 
psychiatric issues, HIV management, and AIDS, and should not 
only be, as Mr. Ingle is, an expert in custody and security 
matters . 

ACT UP has several demands. You will hear more 

|| 

demands from our next speaker, but some of our demands we 
consider to be absolutely essential. 

And first of all, we would like to suggest that the 
Committee not be swayed by a popular phrase these days, 
"confirmation conversion." Like we understand a lot of things 
have changed at CMF this week, and that's all very nice, and 
we're extremely grateful. We realize that these reverses could 
be just as quickly reversed. So we are asking this Committee 
not to confirm Warden Ingle. 

We're also asking, as our second request, the 
appointment of a new CMO, and a staff who have expertise in 
AIDS. Dr. Camasura, everyone agrees, seems to be a disaster. 

We also asked for reassignment of Associate Warden 
Graham to a position from which she can no longer inhibit and 



II 78 

block humane care for HIV-positive prisoners. 

I 

Our third request is for establishment of a round 

I 
table with oversight by this Committee. That will be gone into 

in great detail by our next speaker. 

I 

We ask for full implementation of the Gates and CRIPA 

I 

decrees within 60 days. You did notice that Mr. Ingle used a 



9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



Committee, and we'd like a timeline. 

Finally, we would like oversight of this Committee by 

'i ... 

every aspect of these controversial issues until the State of 

^California has formalized and implemented a satisfactory AIDS 

policy. 

I attended a hearing with Director Gomez on March 

i , . ... 

:11th at which he publicly admitted that there is no California 

HIV/AIDS policy in regard to prisons. There is no overall 

master plan yet. This is not acceptable. With what is coming 

down the road, a thousand men at CMF with AIDS, one dying 

:| everyday, this is not acceptable. 

Don't let the CDC tell you that these things aren't 

possible because they have no money. That's probably what 

they'll say. These things would not cost anything. And, the 

CDC managed to find $9.8 million in this year's budget for 

lethal fences to build around every California prison. These 

are hideous, inhuman parallels to the bug lights that kill 

insects. If the can find $9.8 million for those, they can find 

some money to treat prisoners with AIDS. 



1 

2 

i! 

3 J 
|| 
I 

4 j 
5 



79 
So, don't accept that there isn't enough money, 

please. To say there isn't enough human feeling would probably 

be closer to the mark. 

Thank you very much for your attention. ACT UP, 



fight back, fight AIDS. 
6 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much, sir. 

7 i 1 

Let me just digress and take a moment here. 

8 

il [Brief discussion off the record.] 

9 I 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Ladies and gentlemen, and Mr. Ingle, 
10 

ijl'd like to take a break now. I'll tell you exactly why. 

11 I 

Two of our Members are presenting bills in Ways and 

12 

Means, which is over in the other House, in the Assembly. And 

13 

'jour President Pro Tem, David Robert i, is involved with other 

14 

'legislative business. I hadn't expected him back at all. 

15 1 

I would like to have enough Members here, hearing 
16 

this testimony that you care to deliver to us, because it's only 

17 

iifair to you that you have a group or a body up here that can 
18 

take an action. Senator Beverly and I, we can't do that because 

19 

jjwe're not a quorum. 

20 

So, let's break for 15 minutes, and we will send the 

21 

Sergeants out to try to round up our Senators. 



22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



[Thereupon a brief recess was taken.] 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Let's reconvene. 
We had some other persons who wished to give 
testimony. They're coming back in. 

If you would come forward, please. We'll be happy to 

i 

hear from you. You may stand or be seated, whatever you choose. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



80 

MS. WOOD: Good afternoon. My name is Anne Wood. 

jll'm a client services coordinator for the Sierra-Foothills AIDS 

Foundation. We provide services to persons with HIV disease in 

Nevada County, Placer County, Amador County, and Calaveras 

County, and sometimes our clients wind up as clients of Mr. 

Ingle. 

I'm here to speak to you about the concerns of many 

persons and organizations regarding the suitability of George 

jingle for confirmation as permanent Warden at the California 

Medical Facility at Vacaville. 

Among other groups which have been involved in 

expressing their grave concerns are: Physicians for Responsible 

Government; the California Medical Association; the California 
I 
Psychiatric Association; the San Francisco AIDS Foundation; 

California Legal Assistance for Prisoners; the Shanti 

Foundation; Correctional HIV Consortium; AIDS Project San Diego; 

the Inland Empire AIDS-CAP; the Minority AIDS Project; the 

\ Friends Committee on Legislation; the California HIV 

Activist-Inmate Network known as CHAIN; the Episcopal Diocese of 

Northern California; various chapters of ACT UP from across the 

state; and many, many others, some of whom have spoken to you 

today . 

In my written remarks, you may note that two Catholic 

Dioceses are listed, but at this time they've chosen to remain 

neutral. 

Each of these organizations and speakers bring its 

own unique concerns and approaches to the issues at hand: 



3 

4 

5 

I 
6 

7 | 

8 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



81 

opposition to the confirmation of George Ingle as Warden at CMF 

Vacaville. But each also shares the convictions that citizens 

must take action to ensure that the Department of Corrections 

and the Legislature take the high moral ground in this 

instance. 

Each also shares the feeling that, although inmates 

are incarcerated, prisoners with medical, psychiatric, and HIV 
ii 
(conditions have the right to adequate care and treatment which 

should be measured against the community standard. Each has a 
I 
right to complete his or her incarceration and be released. 

They have a right to live as long as possible. 

In the time since Mr. Ingle has begun his service at 
CMF, medical psychiatric, and particularly HIV operations have 
shown a marked decrease in appropriate activity and quality. We 
strongly urge the Senate Rules Committee not to confirm Mr. 
Ingle as the permanent at Warden. 

In the event that confirmation cannot be avoided in 
favor of a more appropriate candidate, I would request on behalf 
of my associates in this matter that Warden Ingle be confirmed 
ionly if subject to the following terms and conditions. 

One, immediate appointment of a physician trained and 

experienced in HIV disease and its treatment in a correctional 

setting to act as CMO for the HIV program. 
i 

Two, immediate appointment of a new Associate Warden 

and a new correctional captain program administrator. It is our 

opinion that there are no adequately qualified personnel for 

j these positions currently with the California Department of 



1 I! 
II 

2 !! 



82 
-Corrections. Appointment of correctional lieutenants, 
sergeants, and correctional officers who have freely indicated a 
desire to work in close association with HIV positive and 

!i 

terminally ill inmates, and who have successfully completed a 
j] 
sensitization program relating to the medical and psychological 

''issues surrounding HIV disease. 

j . ... 

Three, increased utilization of the Men's Advisory 

i 



10 

11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 

called for in the previously approved budget change proposals. 

23 < 

Nine, immediate re-establishment of the Hospice 

24 

Service Program and its five staff positions. 

25 

Ten, restoration of the Pastoral Care Services 

26 

Program to original scope and operation procedures as outlined 

27 

'in the original program literature, to pre-Ingle/Graham 



psychiatric services for either crisis intervention or ongoing 
treatment, regardless of the inmate's category or classification 
status . 

Five, full compliance, within 90 days, of all issues 
in the Gates Consent Decree and CRIPA. 

Six, immediate curtailment of custodial and medical 
technical personnel's short-stopping of or otherwise tampering 
with legitimate physician's orders. 

Seven, establishment of an HIV round table working 
group which would meet once per month. 

Eight, within 90 days, establish the 25-bed hospice, 
the 15-bed step-down unit, and have same fully operational, as 



1 83 

1 i 

functioning, and a cessation of harassment of PCS staff persons 

2 ; 

by medical technical assistants, custody, and middle management. 

3 : ! 

Eleven, a cessation of the harassment and 

4 

stress-creating situations and actions of medical technical 

5 

assistants and custodial personnel in HIV living and program 
6 

areas. 

7 
8 
9 
10 || 

11 

I 
i 
12 

13 '; 

14 : 



15 
16 

17 
18 
19 
20 

21 
22 
23 

24 

II 
25 

26 

27 

28 | 



Twelve, the utilization of existing employee 
positions to ensure that all Category O medical prisoners to 
include HIV positive prisoners, J and K, psychiatric inmates, 
have a release plan in place no later than 45 days prior to 
their release. 

Thirteen, submission by the working group of a 
regular quarterly report to the membership of the Senate Rules 
Committee and the Director of the CDC for three years. 

Fourteen, no double celling or diet curtailment for 
HIV positive prisoners. Adequate access to rapid medical care. 
Electricity within cells. Development and implementation of a 
plan to install climate control in all medical, psychiatric, and 
HIV positive inmate living and program areas before the next 
heat wave season. 

Fifteen, work with nonprofit community-based programs 
to find incarceration alternatives for person who are within one 
year of their death. 

This list of conditions does not necessarily equally 
represent the particular concerns and priorities of each of our 
constituent organizations. It will, however, allow the Senate 
Rules Committee to, if absolutely necessary, confirm Mr. Ingle, 



84 
1 

and in so doing so with these conditions, demonstrate to the 
people of California that, while the Members of the Rules 
Committee recognize the need for punishment of wrong-doing, they 

4 

also understand the need for a continuing presence to ensure 
5 

|| that there is humane and appropriate treatment. 

6 

Confirmation, if necessary, can only be seen as 

7 J 

acceptable if it is accompanied by these conditions and the 
8 

(continuing oversight of the Rules Committee. 

i Thank you. 

10 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Let me ask you a question or two, if 
11 

I may. 

Tell me again the name of your organization. 

13 

MS. WOOD: Sierra-Foothills AIDS Foundation. 

14 

15 

16 

li 
i| 

17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 ; 

25 

II 

26 

presume? 

27 

MS. WOOD: Those are all volunteers. We have hired 

28 



SENATOR CRAVEN: That's a volunteer group, I presume. 

MS. WOOD: We do have volunteers, yes, sir. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Well, when you say it that way, it 
would indicate to me that you are a professional. 

MS. WOOD: I am a volunteer. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Okay, then, you're a vblunteer. You 
misled me. 

Is there a professional or executive officer who runs 
that organization? 

MS. WOOD: We're run by a Board of Directors, a 
working Board of Directors. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: But they're all volunteers, I 



85 

1 

case management paid staff that are — our case managers are 

2 

paid, and our Administrative Assistant is paid. 

3 

SENATOR CRAVEN: From money you raise in the 

4 

community? 

5 

MS. WOOD: Yes, sir. 
6 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Did you have any contact with the 

7 

facility prior to the AIDS epidemic? 
8 

MS. WOOD: No, sir. 

9 

SENATOR CRAVEN: So basically, it is really solely 
10 

around that milieu; is that correct? 



MS. WOOD: Yes, that's correct. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very well, now I understand a little 



better . 



11 

12 
13 
14 

15 
16 
17 

It really is a program for, in my judgment, a new 

18 

facility because it's so extensive. Many of us, I think, at 



You've obviously done a lot of backgrounding and 
research. I listened very intently to what you said and the 15 
items, I think, you made mention of. 



19 
20 
21 

22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



times run into a situation where we see and hear things like 
that, and we think we'd like it to begin over, but that creates 
a problem, and invariably, that bugaboo of having no money also 
creates another problem. 

I just — you know, you wound it up on sort of a 
happy note by saying, you know, you would be in support of this 
gentleman if these things were taken care of. 

I think that you are old enough and facile enough 
mentally to recognize that none of those things are going to 



86 

happen just overnight, and all of them, being a contingent as it 

2 I 

relates to him, would be sort of difficult to field, too. 

3 J! 

MS. WOOD: I do understand that, sir. 

4 

I think what we are most concerned with is that we 

5 I 

saw things moving along rather well before he came, and we have 

6 I 

seen a backslide since. 

7 j| 

SENATOR CRAVEN: So the transition, you didn't 

^particularly think, was moving in the right or more favorable 

9 I! 

direction. 

10 |l 

MS. WOOD: Correct. 
11 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Maybe we'll get to that. Maybe some 

12 

of my colleagues have some thoughts here. 

13 

Senator Mello. 

14 

SENATOR MELLO: My question will be director to 
15 

'Mr. Ingle, because I think whether you belong to one group, 

16 

volunteer or paid, what my concern is, what is your formal 

17 

policy that relates to the treatment of HIV positive inmates or 

18 

persons with confirmed AIDS? Is it a written policy? 
19 

MR. INGLE: That's correct. 

20 

Contrary to the previous speaker, the Department has 

21 

had a policy for a number of years on the housing and care of 

22 
" i 

'HIV inmates. And of course, we comply with the departmental 



23 

24 
25 



policy. 

CMF has — 

SENATOR MELLO: Departmental, is this statewide as 
administered by the State Department of Corrections? 

MR. INGLE: That's correct. 



87 
SENATOR MELLO: It's in writing? 



2 | 

MR. INGLE: Yes, it is. 



3 

I 

I 

5 
6 

7 



8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



SENATOR MELLO: I guess the question here is whether 



or not you're administering this program differently in your 
facility than the written regulations are prescribed by 
Mr. Gomez and the State Department. 

Do you think you're following his — 

MR. INGLE: We're in compliance with the departmental 
policy. 

SENATOR MELLO: What is your policy? She talked 
about double celling, electricity in each cell, and about other 
! types of things. 

What is your policy? Once a person has become HIV 
positive, how are they treated differently from other inmates? 

MR. INGLE: At CMF, our housing of it is a little 

different than some institutions. We have both a closed and 

■i 
open unit. 

A closed unit is a unit in which inmates who have had 
recent behavior that puts them at risk of transmitting the 
disease to other inmates are housed. 

And then we have the open unit, which is a unit that 
houses the HIV inmates, however they are — during the day, they 
go out to the regular program the same as any other general 
population non-HIV inmate. 

So, that's basically the housing policy. Of course, 

ii 

the care of the HIV inmates is departmental policy. The policy 
is directed out of — out of our headquarters in terms of the 



88 

1 

Health Services Division, and our medical staff comply with that 

2 

I policy in terms of the treatment we provide to the inmates. 

3 : ; 

SENATOR MELLO: Let me ask the lady, then. 

You're familiar with this CMF facility at Vacaville, 

II 

; but in your opinion, is this gentleman administering the formal 

i; state policy differently than other institutions, or is it being 

carried out the same way? 

Is there a problem with the statewide methodology 

I of handling HIV positive patients, or it just this one facility 

that's doing it differently than other facilities? 

MS. WOOD: I'm not really qualified to answer that, 

but what I would say is that I think it's a problem everywhere, 

not the methodology, but the overcrowding and the conditions in 

all of our prisons. 

SENATOR MELLO: So it is statewide, then, based on 

that . 
•i 

MS. WOOD: I have no experience with the other 

facilities, other than knowing that they're all overcrowded. 

SENATOR MELLO: Well, I'm concerned about his 
treatment of all inmates, but the whole AIDS epidemic is getting 
larger, and larger, and larger, and I think we just have to find 
ways of treating it. 

Mr. Chairman, I'm reluctant to ask Mr. Gomez if he 
would volunteer to come and maybe shed some light on this. He's 
a person I have a lot of respect for. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Fine. 

... 
SENATOR MELLO: He was confirmed by this Committee. 



4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



89 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you for the testimony, dear. 
SENATOR MELLO: Mr. Gomez, what I'd kind of like to 
know, you've heard all of the allegations there. Is there a 
problem statewide? Is there something you need to come to the 
Legislature for and ask for? 

Your Department of Corrections budget certainly is, 
irt a tough year like this, being cut a lot less than a lot of 
other departments, but also the spread of HIV and AIDS is 

something that's having dire consequences. 

... 
From your own perspective statewide, do you think 

this facility is treating patients differently than others? Or 

is it something that's coming down from the top? 

MR. GOMEZ: I believe this institution is in 
compliance with our requirements. 

I think they are treating people different than 
others, because they have the most debilitated AIDS clients 
within the system. As people get sick, they only — very sick, 
they only go to three institutions when they need significant 
medical care: CMC, CMF, and CIM. They're the only ones that 
have licensed hospitals. 

So, when the disease progresses to a point where you 
need significant medical care, you're going to be transferred to 
one of those three facilities. Vacaville is the largest of 
those facilities and has the most resources and capability to 
deal with it. 

So, I think when the individual spoke about statewide 
versus Vacaville, certainly there's much more pressure on 



90 
Vacaville because it becomes a hub for the state. 

When Mr. Ingle said that he opened up — is opening 
!up a 500-bed unit, right now we only have 150 people that are 

4 

going to move into that unit. We're opening up a 500-bed unit 

5 jl 

because we know in the future more and more people will be 



2 



3 



6 

7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



Icoming in, and they'll be coming into that unit over the next 
'year or two years as the population and the epidemic continues 
to impact the Department of Corrections. 

But I think Mr. Ingle is clearly implementing within 
those policies. I think that he's hampered by a couple of 
things as a Director. We have a budget in which he has two 
major issues in that budget, the first being a Patient 
Psychiatric Program; second being a HIV Center. Both of those 
items are on hold until whatever budget passes. We have 
requested additional funds. In fact, Senator, we redirected 
'from within the Department, because there was no new money 
available. We've redirected over $3 million to those programs. 

In addition to that, I think it's important to note 
that he has requested, as he testified, additional recruitment 
and retention bonuses, up to $12,000 a year for doctors and 
others, to try and better attract individuals to that. And some 
iof our recent labor agreements which you voted on in this body 
have contained those agreement, subject to a budget, and subject 
to financial approval. 

I think in addition to that, we have recently worked 
with Senator Roberti's office and Assemblyman Costa, and we are 
putting in, in this year's '92-3 budget, there are all of the 



91 
1 

working drawings and construction drawings for redoing this HIV 

2 

Center, about a $3-4 million project. 

3 !! 

We have asked, and Senator Roberti and Assemblyman 

4 

Costa are going to try and amend a bill to include the 

5 : 

construction money so that we can even further that along. 

6 

But I can tell you, it won't meet all the needs of — 

7 || 

that have been asked for by these groups. We will not have air 

8 | 

conditioning for everybody in Vacaville. That's a $30 million 



9 
10 
11 

12 , j 

13 

14 

15 

li 
16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

I 

22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



project; we will not have that. 

So, there are somethings that they are requesting 
that I think that we will be bringing on board when this budget 
passes, and it will take time. It'll take six months, nine 
months, to do some of this stuff. 

On the other hand, there's somethings requesting on a 
statewide policy basis that I don't think I would agree to. 

SENATOR MELLO: Let me ask you another question, 
briefly, and I appreciate you coming here to offer some help on 
this. 

Just briefly, what is your own philosophy and 
perception of looking at HIV positive inmates — 

MR. GOMEZ: I believe that — 

SENATOR MELLO: — as far as how do you think they 
should be treated? 

And a follow-up with that, as she pointed out, the 
need for a hospice. I think the last year of life is probably 
just like a terminal cancer patient or someone else, it's most 
devastating as far as what their needs are. 



1 

2 I 

3 I 
4 

5 ! 

1 

il 
6 

■ 

7 

8 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



92 

So, what's your philosophy as far as once the 
identification of an HIV positive, from that point, what is your 
philosophy and perceptions as far as their treatment levels? 

MR. GOMEZ: I think they should have adequate medical 
care consistent with community standards. I think that's 
difficult to achieve. We try on a daily, hourly basis — 

SENATOR MELLO: How do you base community standards 
in a place like — or any place where there's a Vacaville or 
Soledad, how do you measure them with the community? 

MR. GOMEZ: I think you measure it by the amount of 
nursing capability you provide, the type of equipment you 
provide, the qualifications of the doctors you provide, 
sufficient doctors in order to meet that need. 

I think that Vacaville, because of the concentration 
of individuals, has a difficult task to go out and recruit and 
retain these individuals. 

When I asked Mr. Ingle to take this job, he was the 
Warden at Mule Creek, the toughest job in the state. I asked 
him to move from Mule Creek to come here, because I thought he 
would have the consistency, the caring, and the dedication over 
a five-year period to make this a model program. 

I recognize that today, that it is not a model 
program, but it is an awful good program. We must remember a 
couple things. One, the first thing it is is a prison. The 
first thing it is, is these people were convicted of a felony. 

The second thing is, it's a hospital, and they should 
be provided medical treatment. 



3 
4 
5 
6 

7 
8 

» j 

10 
11 
12 
13 

14 

i 

15 
16 

17 : 

18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



93 

We have a compassionate relief program that I think 
is operating much better today than it was in the past. I think 
we have some improvements that have been made, but we have a 
ways to go. 

But I can tell you very clearly that this is a 
difficult problem for the Department of Corrections, as it's a 
difficult for our society. 

You would not believe the number of people that 
return to Vacaville on a parole violation because they can't get 
adequate medical care in the community, or an adequate support 
system in the community, who come back to Vacaville because 
there is an adequate level of care. 

Now, that does not speak well for us as California. 
It does not speak well for us as California, but it speaks well 
that at least there's a level of treatment going on at the 
California Medical Facility and a support system there. 

SENATOR MELLO: Let me ask if you meant to say it the 
way I heard it come out, and that is, are people who are on the 
outside that become a technical parole violator, get back on the 
inside and get referred to Vacaville as a way of getting 
treatment for AIDS? 

MR. GOMEZ: Yes, I think your staff would verify 
that. I think if you'd talk to people, you would verify that. 
I think that it depends upon the community 

You go to San Francisco, there's a network in San 
Francisco, a very good network. You go to L.A. , in many areas 
there's a network, and San Francisco, where there's a caring 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



94 
community that comes together and takes care of people. 

That same network does not exist throughout this 
state in 58 counties in that same degree. There are many people 
who don't end up in those particular networks. And I've gone to 
L.A. and met with ACT UP. I've gone and met with the AIDS 
Project and others, to talk to them about that, to try and work 
with them. 

There is not the same level of care out in our 
community that some of us would like to believe today, and I 
think that you would find that people have come back to 
Vacaville in a large number on that issue. 

SENATOR MELLO: Well, thank you for answering that. 
The thing is that I know people that have moved to San 
Francisco, for an example, from around the world because of the 
services you talk about. 

Now just to see what this impacts, these are people 
that probably could be residing outside of prison in a community 
atmosphere, but once they go back, $26,000 for incarceration in 
a state institution — 

MR. GOMEZ: About 20,000, plus then you would add — 

SENATOR MELLO: Plus the AIDS support services which 
are estimated at how much more? 

MR. GOMEZ: It depends — depends upon the 
individual, how long they're there. 

But obviously, if someone goes through a significant 
crisis with AIDS over time, bills can run to hundreds of 
thousands of dollars for treatment, for medication, and so on. 



95 
SENATOR MELLO: This is something that I was not 

2 ;j 

aware of. I was aware of it now that you mention it, but it's 



3 

4 
5 
6 1 

7 

9 I 



10 
11 
12 
13 

14 
15 
16 

17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



sure something we have to take a look at in the budget. In 
other words, we could save considerable amount of money if we 
would have more support services throughout the state, rather 

i 

I than doing what's happening, that that is people coming back to 
prison in order to get AIDS treatment. 

MR. GOMEZ: I can only tell you that the higher — 
the highest parole revocation rate of anything we have in the 

ij Department is the revocation rate on individuals with HIV, a 

I 

ji significant return. 

SENATOR MELLO: Thank you very much. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very well, anyone else who wishes to 
testify? Please come forward. 

MS. HARRIS: Good afternoon, almost evening, Mr. 
Chairman, ladies and gentlemen. 

My name is Joy Harris. I obviously don't have a 

'prepared speech. 

... 
I am a retired public health nursing director. I have 

over 35 years of experience in general health fields, public 

health; nine years affiliation with correctional health. So, I 

have some understanding of red tape, budgets, locked doors, all 

; the multiple problems that people can be involved with when 

you're talking correctional health. 

... 
I happened to be instrumental in working with the 

California Medical Association in setting up the third 

!| 

accredited correctional health program in the State of 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



96 
California, the Santa Barbara County Jail Health Program. 

So, I do have some understanding of what Mr. Ingle is 

facing. He is facing it on a much larger scope than I was 

|i 
concerned was, and I appreciate fact. 

I have no question about his qualifications as a 

Warden. It's far beyond my comprehension. 

I do have, I think, probably a better idea what he's 

|l facing from the health point of view. I am a frequent visitor 

to Vacaville, because we have clients there from the 

|l Sierra-Foothill AIDS Foundation. I am one of the founders. I 

am currently an officer of the Board and past president. 

And Mrs. Wood, while she is a volunteer, was the 
i 
founder of our program, as she was the program in Santa Barbara 

County, which is now about a half million dollar AIDS service 

S program. 



•I 



So, you probably meant no implication of downgrading 

her as a volunteer from a paid person, but dealing with 

il volunteers on a large scale, it sort of felt that way to me. 

'I 

Ij So, I'd like to put forward this lady as a model for this state 

ij in setting up programs and dealing with people with AIDS/HIV 

disease. 

I 

Having been a visitor to Vacaville, having talked 
with persons there who have AIDS, persons there who are HIV 
positive, person who were involved in setting up budding 
programs, such as the hospice unit, such as the trained buddies 
or matches, who were there to support persons who are sick and 
dying with AIDS, and having seen those programs deteriorate over 



97 
1 

the past year, I have written to Mr. Ingle about these concerns 

2 

of mine as a health professional. I received a very nice 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 ! 



14 

15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



response from him. 

And I know that he is not totally responsible for all 
these things, but the buck is going to stop on his desk. And if 
the programs are deteriorating in his presence, while there may 
| be plans for doing things at a later date, the need is now. The 
need will only grow. 

I have no opposition to him as Warden, because I have 
|no expertise to question his expertise. 

There are programs available in the State of 

California to assist in implementing excellent correctional 

ii 

health medical programs. I support the suggestions or demands, 

|i 

or whatever you call it, that have been made today for programs 

i 

at Vacaville at the California Medical Facility. I would 

encourage Mr. Ingle to surround himself with the best possible 

medical advice, and to re-establish the programs that were 

already starting, because he was on the way to becoming a model, 

not only for California, but for other states. 

.If he is confirmed, I wish him well, and refer him to 
the California Medical Association and their correctional health 
facility program for advice and support. 

Thank you very much. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you. 



Anyone else wish to comment? 

i 



MR. LOFASO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Alan Lofaso 

i 

representing AIDS Project Los Angeles. 



98 

I'll attempt to be brief. 

I represent the facility or the organization in Los 
Angeles that Mr. Gomez referenced earlier, that the Department 
has worked with in the effort to better the conditions for HIV 
infected inmates. 

And I'm not privy to all of the discussions between 

7 

our organization and Mr. Gomez and Mr. Gomez's office, but I'm 



8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



aware that one of the issues we're concerned about is the 
ability of prisoners to access experimental treatments that, in 
many cases, are made available on a compassionate use basis by 
manufacturers at no cost to either the Department or the 
patient. 

This does require physicians who are versed in the 
medicine using these treatments, but it doesn't actually cost 
the Department any more. 

I'd also like to observe that Ms. Wood's concerns 
that she addressed, the conditions she would like imposed on the 
confirmation should it happen, eight of them have no added cost 
to the Department, as I understand them, and I think I'm being 
conservative: to restore a staffer who wasn't there; or to 
increase the utilization of the Men's Advisory Council; or to 
comply with the Gates Consent Decree, which is already the law; 
or to immediate curtail custodial or medical technical 
personnel's shortstopping and otherwise tampering with 
legitimate physician's orders. 

Some of these issues are sensitivity issues, and 
issues that relate to understanding the needs of the prisoner 



99 

1 

iand won't add any cost to the Department of Corrections, and 

2 

there's about eight of those fifteen, I think, fit in that 
3 « 

category. 

4 

Finally, with regard to the plan, I want to offer a 



1 

statistic for the Department that I believe as of April last 



year, there were 737 HIV infected inmates in the Corrections 
7 ,! 

system. By the middle of 1997, I believe, there are supposed to 



be in excess of 2200, and that is Department of Corrections 
'figures. And that is the impetus for much of the concern about 

i 

more aggressive planning to address these needs. 

In closing, I'd just like to urge the Committee to 

abide by the recommendation that Ms. Woods and Mr. Lewis made, 

I 
to engage in greater oversight. And as an organization that is 

present both in Sacramento, we feel we'd also like to provide 

any assistance we can in assisting that effort. 

Thank you. 

j 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very well, thank you very much. 

Is there anyone else who wishes to testify? Yes, 
ma'am. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: While she's coming forward, Mr. 
Chairman, may I ask the Warden a question? 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Sure. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Who appoints the chief medical 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



100 

SENATOR BEVERLY: And he makes the appointment that 
iyou recommend, thank you. 

MS. YELLOWBIRD: Hi, my name is Ellen Yellowbird. 
I'm with ACT UP, San Francisco. 

And what I want to say is that under Ingle's 
leadership, we have seen the situation at Vacaville in relation 
to people with AIDS, their medical care, as well as their 
support network, rapidly deteriorate. It's a serious situation. 
lAnd we just want to call attention to the fact that it has been 
under his leadership that this has happened. 

The Pastoral Care Services has disintegrated just 
within the past few months, to the point where it's barely 
i! functioning. There's no excuse for that. It was a volunteer 
service . 

SENATOR CRAVEN: May I ask, when we use the term 
Pastoral Care, is that something of a religious nature? 

MS. YELLOWBIRD: Right. It's run by the Catholic 
Chaplain, and it uses volunteers who are inmates at the prison 
as well as volunteer from outside, who then — it's a support 
hospice like support network for prisoners with AIDS. 

This — it has deteriorated. It has not been allowed 
to — 

SENATOR CRAVEN: The Chaplaincy presumably existed 
long before we had the crisis. 

MS. YELLOWBIRD: Right. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: And now, again presuming, it's 
reacting to the crisis which has befallen us, all right? Can 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



101 

you follow me so far? 

MS. YELLOWBIRD: No, I don't — I really don't follow 

you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Well, what I'm saying is that longer 
i| 
before anybody heard of HIV or AIDS — 

MS. YELLOWBIRD: Right. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: — there was a Chaplaincy there. 

MS. YELLOWBIRD: Right, of course. What I'm saying 

is — 

|| 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Now, how could that Chaplaincy have 

deteriorated by virtue of a new problem? 

MS. YELLOWBIRD: No, it's not the Chaplaincy. It's 
ithat — it's Wardens who have authority over what goes on in a 
prison. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: So, in other words, what you're 
saying, as I understand you, is that because of the control 
vested in the Warden, they have cut back services extended by 
the Chaplains. 

MS. YELLOWBIRD: Right, well, you see, this is — 
this is a service where it's other inmates who are being trained 
to counsel other inmates. Now, correctional officers can be 
told to intimidate inmates to a point where it's going to be too 
difficult for them to proceed with their function, and this has 
been happening. 

A number — I mean, we don't need to go into all the 
details. All I can say is, it was — the setup was functioning 
well. It needed to grow stronger. And then, in the past few 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



102 

months, it has deteriorated in a number of ways, as has the 

medical care now that doctors like Dr. Maisonet are not there. 

And even before, Vacaville was, in a sense, a model facility for 

HIV care because it was forced to become one, because of a 

lawsuit, and even at that point, people were not really getting 

appropriate medical care that they needed until they were very, 

i 

very ill. 

So now, it's even worse. And it's an alarming 

situation that we have happening there. And regardless of 

iwhether Ingle is put as the Warden or somebody else, it's just 

— this needs to be addressed. 

i 

I really want to encourage the idea that Wardens that 

. ... ..... 

come into these facilities at this point in time, in every 

institution, especially at Vacaville, but in every one, really 

needs to be well-versed in AIDS and HIV, because we have 

high-risk communities. Those are — people from high-risk 

communities are predominately the ones ending up in prison. The 

way HIV is spread is through drugs, it's through sex. We don't 

have any way of having precautions for these things in prison, 

so it's, you know, the rate it's spreading is incredible. And 

we need people who are competent, capable, and not in denial 

about AIDS. 

Right now, Vacaville is a mess in terms of its AIDS 
care. And this has — it has deteriorated under Ingle at a 
point where we need it go get better fast. We need physicians 
who are well-versed in HIV and AIDS. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Fine, thank you very much. 



2 
3 

4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 



12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



103 

Anyone else? Yes. 

FATHER LESLIE: Mr. Chairman, I'm the Catholic 
Chaplain at the California Medical Facility, and I would like to 
speak to the last issue that was raised. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Would you state your name. 

FATHER LESLIE: My name is Patrick Leslie. 

Pastoral Care Services is the name we came up with to 
try to define what we were about, which is to provide the 
terminally ill inmates with quality, compassionate, palliative 
care at Vacaville. And it's a program aimed at getting other 
inmates to provide peer counseling and support. 

And we've functioned now for — since March of last 
year. And the program, contrary to the last speaker, is not 
disintegrating. The program has contained the same level of 
volunteers as we started. 

Like all programs in a prison, there have been 
problems, and we have worked with them and worked through them. 
And we continue to provide care. 

I just wanted to put that on the record and say that 
the number of volunteers are about the same. The number of 
clients are growing, and we continue to provide in the best way 
that we can at this time a quality, compassionate, palliative 
care for our terminally ill. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: May I ask a question. 

How do you obtain peers? How do you reach out to get 
the people who you feel are qualified to extend the service and 
the compassion that is required? 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



104 

FATHER LESLIE: We announce it through our Chapel 
Program. We announce it through bulletins and fliers throughout 
the institution. And most of all, I think, by word of mouth, 
and then the inmates that are interested come forward. We begin 
a screening process to see if they meet the criteria to work. 
And if they do, we provide them with training, and then an 
ongoing training program. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Do you have a regular quarterly 
recruitment for this sort of thing, or when do you do that? 

FATHER LESLIE: Yes, we have — roughly every three 
months we provide new training, and we have recruitment. At the 
moment, we're recruiting for our training at the end of 
September . 

SENATOR CRAVEN: In your judgment, it has worked 
well? 

FATHER LESLIE: It has worked well, yes. It's 
continued to work well, and we've had support at all times from 
the Warden level, and particularly from Mr. Ingle since he came 
into it. He's been very supportive. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Father, let me ask you, have you 
noticed any difference between his tenure and that of his 
predecessor? 

FATHER LESLIE: Not in the support of our program. 
The support has been the same. He's been very supportive at 
that level. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very well. 

Any questions from any of the Member? 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



105 

Thank you very much 

Anyone else who wishes to testify? 

I guess that's taken all of them. 

SENATOR MELLO: I'd like to ask Mr. Ingle a question. 

In view of the testimony here on this increasing 
problem of the spread of the HIV positive, what do you think — 
I'm asking what tools do you think you need as a Warden in 
Vacaville from the state — well, you'd have to go through your 
Department of Corrections, but Mr. Gomez said you've already 
asked him for additional money for doctors. 

What can we do to help the situation, which appears 
to be needing some help? I don't know just what it might be 
from Sacramento. 

MR. INGLE: I really think we're on the right 
course, contrary to some of the testimony. We have not had a 
hospice before. It was a proposal that was in the BCP that's 
in this budget that we've been waiting for two months to receive 
the money. Once that money is received, we will establish the 
hospice. 

SENATOR MELLO: Is that something you requested 
yourself? 

MR. INGLE: This was prior to my arrival. It was in 
the BCP from last year. 

There's also a step-down unit that we are planning to 
have in place in the very near future. The Pastoral Care 
Program has been in full operation through this time, and as 
Father Leslie indicated, there's been 24 volunteer. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



106 

We have outside volunteers that come in, provide the 
training to the inmates so they can get quality training. 

We're establishing the unit down in the old Reception 
Center area. It's centralized. We provide quality care. We 
have some excellent physicians and health care provides at CMF. 

I think the program, with the additional physicians 
that we'll receive from BCP, from the capital outlay that we'll 
receive, will go along ways to make it an outstanding program. 

I do not think we're on the wrong track. 

SENATOR MELLO: They mentioned specifically lack of 
air conditioning. Are they treated differently as far as air 
conditioning than other inmates? 

MR. INGLE: The only area in the prison that has air 
conditioners is the DMH 150-bed inpatient hospital and our 
65-bed hospital. We will provide air conditioning in our 
step-down unit and in our hospice, but other than that, there's 
not air conditioning within Vacaville. 

As the Director indicated, it would be 30 million- 
plus to try to air condition the entire place. 

We have installed coolers in some areas of our 
psychiatric housing areas, because of the concerns from last 
year and the deaths that had occurred, and we are continuing to 
pursue coolers which take a lot less energy. They're a lot less 
expensive than air conditioning. 

SENATOR MELLO: You mentioned air conditioning the 
entire place, do you believe that the treatment of HIV positives 
should have different level of air conditioning than — because 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

->-> 

23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



107 
of the pain and suffering going on with the deterioration of 
themselves, than, let's say, other normal, healthy inmates? 

MR. INGLE: Other than the inmates that could benefit 
from a hospice or a step-down unit, I have not had any 
recommendations from the medical staff that that would be a need 
item. 

SENATOR MELLO: I guess once they're in intensive 
care or acute care, then they are naturally in an air 
conditioned unit. 

What about, the lady also mentioned about the 
avoiding of double celling. What is the policy now as far as 
putting together an HIV positive with a non-positive person? 
Are they put in the same cell together? 

MR. INGLE: As was indicated earlier, we have 
mediation that's occurring now in federal court with our 
mediator in the Gates Consent Decree. 

What our policy has been was that we will not double 
cell and HIV inmate unless there's medical clearance. 

SENATOR MELLO: You're not double celling them with 
another — 

MR. INGLE: Another inmate without medical 
clearance. 

SENATOR MELLO: In other words, they are put in a 
separate cell? 

MR. INGLE: They're all single cell at this point. 

SENATOR MELLO: Single cell, unless the medical 
directors provide an exemption where they can be double celled. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

1? 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



108 
Would that be with another HIV positive patient? 

MR. INGLE: That's correct, except at this time, 
we have not double celled any. The inmates that have moved down 
to the new HIV Center are all single celled. We have not double 
celled any of them. 

If through this mediation process we were able to 
double cell, then we would only do it if it was medically clear. 

SENATOR MELLO: The lady also mentioned the fact that 
having electricity in each cell. I didn't quite ask her what 
she meant by that. 

Is that electric lights, or having electric plugs, or 
what is that policy? 

MR. INGLE: The Northern Reception Center, when it 
was built, because it was going to be a Reception Center with 
short-term inmates, they did not put electrical outlets in each 
of the cells. 

Part of this BCP that the Director talked bout, this 
amendment to the bill that's going to provide the $3.3 million 
this year, will be to go in and renovate those cells and put in 
electrical outlets. 

As I indicated in my opening statement, as a 
short-term fix in the one unit that we have HIVs at this time 
without electrical outlets, we're doing a quick-fix to put 
outlets in there. 

SENATOR MELLO: What do they use the outlets for? 

MR. INGLE: Fans, t.v.s. They have cell lights in 
there already. It's basically for radios, t.v.s, personal fans. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



109 

SENATOR MELLO: Does that differentiate from other 
inmates? 

MR. INGLE: Yes, all the other units except for the 
two — two units down in the old Northern Reception Center do 
not have electrical outlets. 

SENATOR MELLO: That's going to be remedied now, in 
your opinion, based on the budget — 

MR. INGLE: That's correct. My medical — excuse me, 
my maintenance staff right now are working on the installation 
of electrical outlets in the one housing unit that does not have 
one, which is the HIV unit. 

SENATOR MELLO: You say your capacity, you have 150 
beds with HIV positive patients? 

MR. INGLE: We have 150 inmates in closed wing. 
Those are the inmates that are at risk of transmitting the 
disease. And we have another 150 in an open wing. 

We have capacity to increase to 482 with the staffing 
and the capital outlay that's in the current budget. 

SENATOR MELLO: You say at risk of transmitting the 
disease, does that mean they test HIV positive? 

MR. INGLE: No, they're already HIV positive, but 
they involve themselves in at-risk behavior that could possibly 
transmit the disease to somebody else. 

SENATOR MELLO: So, you have a total of 300 in two 
categories? 

MR. INGLE: That's correct. 

SENATOR MELLO: Thank you. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



110 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Any other questions? 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Are you ready for a motion? 

SENATOR PETRIS: On a different subject, I was 
curious about the 900-something bed psychiatric outpatient 
facility there. 

Where do those patients come from? 

MR. INGLE: From through the system. 

SENATOR PETRIS: What's their average stay there? 

MR. INGLE: I'm not sure that I know the answer to 
that. They do come in for evaluation. If they are determined 
to need psychiatric care, of course, we place them in our 
program. 

SENATOR PETRIS: That's right after conviction; isn't 
it? 

MR. INGLE: Any time during their stay with the 
Department, from reception throughout their stay. If they're 
determined a need to be evaluated, then of course they come to 
our facility for the evaluation. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Also there for treatment? 

MR. INGLE: That's right. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Thanks. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good, no further questions. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Move we recommend confirmation. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Beverly moves. 

SENATOR MELLO: I want to make one comment. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: The lady listing fifteen conditions, 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



111 

I don't believe the Rules Committee has the authority to impose 
conditions at all on any nominee that's up for confirmation, but 
those — if anybody feels strongly about those items, and I know 
she does, I feel they should be taken up with the Department of 
Corrections, and try to implement them from the administrative 
level. 

I don't think we have any authority at all to impose 
those kind of conditions on any nominee up fro Senate 
confirmation. 

I just want to let her know that and others, so that 
they don't think we're not in sympathy with what they're doing. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Unless it ' s a requirement to obey 
the law. We've had that before. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I would say this, and ordinarily I 
don't make such a comment as this, but I've been impressed with 
both sides of this issue. I think the testimony on both sides 
has been excellent. 

I'm encouraged in hearing some the things that have 
been said by Mr. Ingle and Mr. Gomez as well, but I don't think 
there's any question in the minds of any of us that following 
the conclusion of this particular hearing, with the proviso that 
Mr. Ingle is approved, confirmed, there will be more interest in 
what he is dealing with than there has been heretofore. And it 
will be done with greater knowledge than I have had before. 

I think that's helpful to you and to the people who 
may stand in objection to you by virtue of things over which you 
may not have had tremendous amount of control. 



1 

2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



112 

But I think it's been a good hearing. I hope you 
would agree. 

MR. INGLE: Yes, I do. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Beverly has moved. Call the 
roll, please. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 

Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 

Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

Senator Roberti. 

Four to zero. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Four to zero; to the Floor. Thank 
you, and thank all of you that testified. 

[Thereupon the final vote for 
confirmation was 5-0, as Senator 
Roberti' s aye vote was added 
pursuant to Senate Rule 28.7] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Next we have T. Warren Jackson, 
Member, Fair Employment and Housing Commission. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



113 

MR. JACKSON: Good evening. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Good evening. Now that you're well 
versed on the problems in the penal system — 

MR. JACKSON: Yes. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: — talk to us about the problem in 
the Fair Employment and Housing, I guess. 

MR. JACKSON: Mr. Chairman, esteemed Members, I'm 
honored to be before you again, last year on May 20th, and I'm 
very honored to seek your confirmation of my appointment to 
the Fair Employment and Housing Commission. 

I've been serving since December, and I guess the 
question that's generally asked is why do I think I'm qualified 
for the position? 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Yes. 

MR. JACKSON: I think I'm imminently qualified. At 
the risk of not repeating what I've already said in a written 
letter to all of you, and not further delaying these 
proceedings, particularly since I flew in from Philadelphia and 
have been going since 2:00 o'clock our time, I'll try to be 
brief. 

I have been a labor employment lawyer since my 
graduation from Harvard Law School in 1976, both in private 
practice, O'Melveny and Myers, and for the last eight years at 
Hughes Aircraft Company in Los Angeles. 

Through all that time, I think I've tried to be 
certain things: fair, sensitive, balanced but yet aggressively 
enforcing civil rights. And that's either been in terms of 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



114 
advising clients on the outside as well as advising other 
members of employees of Hughes Aircraft Company, both management 
as well as nonmanagement employees. 

What I have tried to do is be — and that, I think, 
has carried over in terms of what we've done on the Fair 
Employment and Housing Commission since my nomination, is to be 
consistent in terms of our enforcement of that statute with an 
eye on the legislative history and intent. 

And it's important, when I sought out this position, 
I did it with the view of knowing that we're in a critical 
period, I think, in California, where many companies, and the 
state is struggling with the notion of recognizing, valuing 
diversity while we're in an economic downturn. And sometimes, 
that creates a tension, and through that tension, you end up 
with complaints and with litigation. And I think it's our job 
to try to strike a balance, and to demonstrate that equal 
employment opportunity and fair application to all people, as 
well as in an economic recession, are not mutually exclusive 
goals. 

I am — public service is something that is important 
to me. That's why I've sought this out. I've done it 
throughout my professional career. I want to briefly mention a 
couple of things that I'm most proud of as they relate to this 
particular area. 

I have been involved over the last four years in both 
the ABA as well as the California Minority Council programs. 
What those programs are going to do are going to increase the 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



115 
inclusion of minorities and women in the legal profession, the 
notion being that if we in the legal profession cannot lead the 
way in terms of greater inclusion, how can we expect our clients 
and greater society to follow. 

I have been Hughes ' s representative on both those 
commissions since we've joined, and we are — I am quite proud 
of what Hughes has done, and how we have — this is a marathon, 
not a sprint — but we've made great strides in terms of 
increasing the inclusion of minorities and female lawyers in the 
legal profession. 

Also involved in most right now, and something I'm 
also proud of, in light of the recent disturbances in Los 
Angeles, I'm one of the deputy general counsel on the Special 
Advisory Committee. That's a committee chaired by former CIA 
and FBI Director William Webster, which is looking into the LA 
PD's preparation for and response to the civil disorders in Los 
Angeles. And we're looking at a lot of things, including the 
structure of the Department, and how you can best avoid those 
kinds of situations. In fact, that's why I was in Philadelphia. 
I was interviewing members of the Philadelphia Police 
Department . 

I think, unlike other people who spoke here today, 
I've got somewhat of a track record since my appointment. And 
as I look back over the months since December, I think the 
decisions we've rendered, and there haven't been that many, but 
more importantly, the work we've done on drafting regulations 
for the Family Care Leave Act, AB 77, I think demonstrate both 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



116 

my commitment to the personal philosophy that I espouse, and I 
think the entire Commission's strenuous effort in trying to make 
sense out of what in some respects was a muddled statute; to try 
to put on paper what the intent of the Legislators were, and not 
to usurp that role, not to become Legislators ourselves. 

I think we've done a heck of a job, and I'm proud of 
that effort. 

At this point, I think I can stop. I'm more than 
happy to answer any questions you might have. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good, thank you. 

Anyone have any questions? Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: I just want to follow-up on this 
whole area of affirmative action, and the goals, really, of 
trying to bring ethnic groups somewhere into line with the 
population. And as good a job as we're all saying we're doing, 
what are the numbers right now with relationship to populations? 

Like in California, three categories: Hispanics 
working for the state, versus Hispanic population, percentage of 
the total; Black, same thing; and the young Blacks. 

MR. JACKSON: If I understand your question, it's 
what is the percentage — 

SENATOR MELLO: Let me finish it. 

Hispanics make up, let's say, 20 percent of the 
state's — it's over 22 percent of the state's population. 
They're right bout at 9 million out of 30 million, 22 percent. 

In state jobs, what is the percentage of people 
working in the state who represent that ethnic group? Is it 17, 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



117 
11 percent, or 35 percent? 

Same thing with Blacks, who make up about 68 percent 
of the population, and the same thing with young Blacks. How do 
they — I know they're under-represented. 

MR. JACKSON: I can't confirm that. I have no 
knowledge about what the representation of the minorities are in 
state government. 

SENATOR MELLO: Then I won't ask you to answer the 
question. What I'll ask you to do is look at those numbers from 
within your agency and just take a look at them, see if you 
think there's room to kind of reach out and try to balance out 
these numbers, which have been lagging way behind here for 
years. It's not something that's come along lately. 

MR. JACKSON: I can comment. 

It seems to me, trying to reflect upon private 
industry, as industries try to — putting aside — I don't want 
to get into the argument of goals versus quotas — but just the 
notion of valuing diversity, and in the climate that we have now 
where there is limited hiring, in point of fact what you're 
really seeing is downsizing. It's a real challenge, not so much 
in terms of trying to increase percentages, but rather trying to 
maintain being sensitive to the diversity or lack there of that 
you may have in your current workforce. That's the challenge 
that all employers, including Hughes, are facing, as we 
downsize. 

SENATOR MELLO: I want to make it clear, I did not 
use the word quotas. 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



118 

MR. JACKSON: No, you did not. 

SENATOR MELLO: I do believe in goals and setting 
forth programs that will reach out, provide, you know, education 
and needed job skills so that when openings, positions, become 
available, they can compete for the job. 

I just think we have to do more in that area. Women 
and minorities are under-represented in the workplace. And 
amongst the state employees in California, we've had the charts 
before us many times in the past, and I know they're available. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Is there anyone in the audience who 
wishes to testify, either pro or con? 

Well, that's fine. 

Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I'm pleased to make a motion we 
recommend confirmation. 

I've known of Mr. Jackson through Hughes Aircraft for 
some time. He enjoys a fine reputation, at least in the Hughes 
community, which is a large community. We have a mutual friend 
in Al Hollingworth, now retired. 

MR. JACKSON: Yes, we do. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Do you ever get to Hughes down in 
Carlsbad? 

MR. JACKSON: Yes, in fact I'm pleased to say we're 
adding — we've got another facility that's also in the San 
Diego area where we're adding jobs. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: That's good to hear. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



119 

Following this vote, I want to make mention of 
something else. 

Call the roll, please. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 

Senator Petris. Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

Senator Roberti. 

Three to zero. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Three-zero to the Floor. 

Congratulations . 

[Thereupon the final vote for 
confirmation was 4-0, as Senator 
Roberti 's aye vote was added 
pursuant to Senate Rule 28.7] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I wanted to ask you if you knew 
either Senator Becky Morgan or Senator Quentin Kopp? 

MR. JACKSON: No, I do not. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Well, I would suggest you get to 
know them, because Senator Morgan, Becky, is a graduate of your 
undergraduate alma mater, and Quentin Kopp is a graduate of your 
law school. I'm sure they'd be very happy to meet you 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



120 
[Thereupon the Senate Rules 
Committee acted upon legislative 
agenda items . ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Now, number eight on the long list 
which we've gone through, Peggy L. Kernan, Warden, Solano County 
State Prison. 

Ms. Kernan, sorry we've kept you waiting so long. 

MS. KERNAN: It's quite all right. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: But better late than never. 

MS. KERNAN: I was happy to be last. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Now you know what it's all like. 
Hopefully, you won't have any problem. 

MS. KERNAN: Senator, my name is Peggy Kernan. I've 
been serving as the Warden at the California State Prison, 
Solano and Vacaville, since January of '92. 

I've been employed by the Department of Corrections 
for 28 years, entering through the clerical ranks and promoting 
to an analyst position. In 1979, I transferred to San Quentin 
State Prison as a correctional lieutenant. This assignment 
provided me with valuable experience and knowledge of prison 
line operations. This position, this experience, also allowed 
me the opportunity to prepare myself for further managerial 
positions. 

Subsequent to this assignment, I had worked three 
other institutions, promoting through the ranks, holding 
positions in supervisory, middle management, and top management 
classifications. My knowledge of prison management has been 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



121 
further enhanced by serving on a variety of departmental task 
forces and special projects which have afforded me an 
understanding of the departmental perspective. 

These experiences and my previous assignment s the 
Chief Deputy Warden of Mule Creek State Prison for over three 
years, have provided me the skill and knowledge necessary to 
perform the duties of a Warden. 

My management style has always been one of open 
communication, and I pride myself on my people-oriented 
philosophy. I take seriously my responsibilities to be fair in 
dealing with any and all issues which impact staff or the inmate 
population. 

Based on my career experiences, I believe that I have 
the abilities to perform as a Warden and meet the expectations 
of this Committee and the Department — and the Director of 
Corrections. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much. 

Any questions of the Rules Committee at this time? 

Anyone wish to testify in favor? There are a few 
coming up. 

MS. CHAFFER: Good evening. My name is Sue Chaffer. 
I'm a correctional officer at California State Prison, Solano. 
I'm also the CCPOA Chapter President at Solano. 

I'm here at the request of my fellow offices to 
speak on their behalf on the confirmation of Ms. Kernan. 

Ms. Kernan has shown continual support to the custody 
line staff in the short period of time that she's been assigned 



1 

2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



122 
at California State Prison, Solano. It's quite evident that Ms. 
Reman' s walked the toughest beat in the state, as a line staff 
member. And her custody experience shows through in her 
policies and procedures that she's implemented since she's been 
there . 

When we go to Ms. Kernan, our concerns are met with 
receptiveness and a true understanding of our position, along 
with resolutions that are reasonable. 

As Ms. Kernan has promoted to the position of Warden 
at California State Prison, Solano, she's maintained a strong 
sense of staff safety, along with fairness and a respect in 
dealing with the correctional officers at California State 
Prison, Solano. 

Ms. Kernan has given the correctional officers a 
sense of pride to say that we work at California State Prison, 
Solano, and that our Warden is Ms. Peggy Kernan. 

So, on behalf of the officers at the California State 
Prison, Solano, we support the confirmation of Ms. Kernan. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much. Very nicely 
done. 

We're getting to know you. 

MS. McKINNEY: I won't introduce myself again, 
because this is now the third time. 

In the interests of time, I'm not going to give you 
the speech that I had prepared for Ms. Kernan. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Just a ringing endorsement? 



2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



123 

MS. McKINNEY: A ringing endorsement. You couldn't 
find anyone with more integrity or more fairness than Ms. 
Kernan. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I've had that suspicion. 

Anyone else who'd like to make a comment? 

How about someone who may not be in favor? Anyone 
along that line? None. 

Very well, let's have a motion. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Move we recommend confirmation. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Beverly moves. 

Call the roll, please. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 

Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 

Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

Senator Roberti. 

Four to zero. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Four to zero; to the Floor. 

MS. KERNAN: Thank you, Senators. 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



124 
[Thereupon the final vote for 
confirmation was 5-0, as Senator 
Roberti ' s aye vote was added 
pursuant to Senate Rule 28.7] 
SENATOR PETRIS: After we made the vote on Mr. 
Caffrey for PERB, some information came to my attention. I 
didn't have before, and I'd like to re-open it so I can ask him 
some questions. 

This is a move that we re-open or set aside the 
prior vote for reconsideration on Mr. Caffrey. 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Not now. 
SENATOR PETRIS: At a future time. 
SENATOR CRAVEN: You've all heard the request. 
Basically it's a request for reconsideration. 

SENATOR MELLO: I just want to ask, I think the 
proper motion's reconsideration. 

SENATOR PETRIS: I move we reconsider. 
SENATOR CRAVEN: We didn't close roll on that. The 
vote was three-zero, I think. 

MR. BERG: Open the vote. Senator Petris can change 



his vote. 



voters? 



SENATOR CRAVEN: Was Senator Petris one of the 



SENATOR PETRIS: I made the motion. 
SENATOR CRAVEN: I recall now. 

Let's open the roll on the confirmation of David M. 
Caffrey, Member, Public Employment Relations Board, and call the 



absentees. 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



his vote. 



do. 



125 



SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: I'm sorry here. What's the motion? 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I'll give Nick a chance to change 

SENATOR PETRIS: No, no. That's not what I want to 



SENATOR MELLO: He wants reconsideration. 

MR. ROLLENS: You have to dispose of the roll call. 
Once you've started the roll call, it has to come to some 
conclusion. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Did we finish the roll call? 

MR. ROLLENS: No. 

SENATOR MELLO: There will be another motion after 
the vote's announced, okay. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Mello. Senator Roberti. 

Three-zero. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Now do you want to move — 

SENATOR PETRIS: Now I'd like to move reconsideration 
be taken up. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Petris moves 
reconsideration. Call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: No. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly No. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 



126 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 

Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 

Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

Senator Roberti. 

Three to one. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Thank you. 

[Thereupon this portion of the 
Senate Rules Committee hearing 
was terminated at approximately 
6:45 P.M. ] 

— ooOoo — 



127 



CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



I, EVELYN J. MIZAK, a Shorthand Reporter of 
the State of California, do hereby certify: 

That I am a disinterested person herein; 
that the foregoing Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
reported verbatim in shorthand by me, Evelyn Mizak, and 
thereafter transcribed into typewriting. 

I further certify that I am not of counsel 
or attorney for any of the parties to said hearing, nor in 
any way interested in the outcome of said hearing. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my 
hand this o^CO day of August, 1992. 



V^^EVELYN J. MIZAlO 
Shorthand Reporter 



210-R 

Additional copies of this publication may be purchased for $7.00 per copy 
plus current California sales tax. 

Senate Publications 
1100 J Street, Room B-15 
Sacramento, CA 95814 

Make checks payable to SENATE RULES COMMITTEE. 
Please include Senate Publication Number 210-R when ordering. 



Soo 






HEARING 

SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



/ 




STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 26,1992 
1:57 P.M. 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

SAN FKw«*»«tM. 



211-R 



27 
28 



1 




2 




3 




4 




5 




6 








7 


. 


8 




9 




10 




11 




12 




13 




14 




■5 




16 




17 




18 




19 




20 




21 




22 




23 




24 




25 




26 


Reported by: 



SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



HEARING 



STATE CAPITOL 
ROOM 3191 
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 26, 1992 
1:57 P.M. 



Evelyn J. Mizak 
Shorthand Reporter 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 



11 



18 
19 



21 

22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 



APPEARANCES 
MEMBERS PRESENT 
SENATOR DAVID ROBERTI , Chair 
SENATOR WILLIAM CRAVEN, Vice Chair 
SENATOR NICHOLAS PETRI S 
SENATOR ROBERT BEVERLY 
SENATOR HENRY MELLO 

STAFF PRESENT 
CLIFF BERG, Executive Officer 
. PAT WEBB, Committee Secretary 

I! 

RICK ROLLENS, Consultant on Bill Referrals 
NANCY MICHEL, Consultant on Governor's Appointments 

ALSO PRESENT 



BOYD H. GIBBONS III, Director 
15 Department of Fish and Game 






16 SENATOR DAN McCORQUODALE 

17 SENATOR DAN BOATWRIGHT 



DAVID M. CAFFREY, Member 

Public Employment Relations Board 



A. VERNON CONRAD, Member 
20 California Regional Water Quality Control Board 
Central Valley Region 



JOHN KREBS, Former Supervisor 
County of Fresno 

LYNN SADLER 

Planning and Conservation League 

MICHAEL PAPARIAN 
Sierra Club 

EILEEN E. PADBERG, Member 
Commission on the Status of Women 



Ill 

APPEARANCES (CONTINUED) 



SENATOR BILL LOCKYER 

JUDITH RYAN, Retired Judge 
Superior Court, County of Orange 



KAREN R. PETERS 
5 National Organization of Women 
Orange County Chapter 

6 i 

DEBORA HINTZ 

National Association of Women Business Owners, and 

National Women's Political Caucus, Orange County 

8 

ROBERT NELSON, President 
9 Nelson Communications 

10 ALETA CARPENTER 



12 
13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



IV 



2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
II 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



INDEX 



Proceedings 

Governor's Appointees: 

BOYD H. GIBBONS III, Director 
Department of Fish and Game 

Statements by SENATOR DAN McCORQUODALE re: 

Previous Discussions with Nominee 

Need to Turn Department Around 

Responsibility of Department for 
Environmental Protection 

Regulations of Department of Forestry 

Requirement that All Persons Who 
Testify on Timber Harvest Plans 
Must be Licensed by Department of 
Forestry 

Intention to Restrict Biologists 
Who Testify 

Questions by SENATOR McCORQUODALE re: 

Appropriateness of Department of Forestry 
to Have Licensing Authority over All 
Biologists 

Lack of Knowledge about Regulations 

Evidence of Ability to Have Clout within 
Resources Agency to Counter Departments of 
Water Resources and Forestry Regulations 

Department's Lack of Position on Bill which 
Would Negate Forestry's Licensing Authority 
over Fish and Game Personnel 

Legislation as Technical Cleanup 

Giving up Jurisdiction 

Meeting with Department of Forestry and 
Fish and Game over Regulations 



Page 

1 



1 
2 

2 
2 



4 
5 

7 



6 



INDEX (CONTINUED) 

Didn't Want Cleanup Legislation Stalled 

over Issue of Licensing Authority 8 

Quote of Executive Officer, Licensing, 

4 Department of Forestry 

5 Avowal to Resist Forestry's Licensing 

Authority over Fish and Game Biologists 9 

Need for Force to Carry out Department's 
Responsibilities 9 

Statements by SENATOR MELLO re: 

Request for Presence of SECRETARY WHEELER 10 

Statements by SENATOR McCORQUODALE re: 

Issue of Striped Bass and Department of 

Water Resources 11 

Payment of Private Contractors 11 

Response by MR. GIBBONS re: 

Several Objections to Distribution of 

Striped Bass 11 

Statements by SENATOR DAN BOATWRIGHT re: 

Misgivings about Appointment 12 

Request for Affirmative Recommendation 12 

Steady Decline of California's Game and 

Waterfowl 13 

SB 1034, which Established Fund to Restore 

Delta Levees and Gave Responsibilities to 

Department of Fish and Game regarding 

Preservation of the Habitat on the Levees 13 

Department Never Signed Off on Any 

Reclamation Plan 13 

MOU Needed to Get Fish and Game 

Involved 13 

Commitment to Transfer Functions of 

Department if Responsibilities of Department 

Are not Fulfilled 14 



VI 



INDEX fCONTINUEDl 

Will Support Director if Director Fights 

for Department 15 

Statements by SENATOR MELLO re: 

Alternative to Abolishing Department of 

Fish and Game 16 

Department Needs to Be Responsive 

to Needs of California 16 

Responsibilities of MR. WHEELER and 

MR. GIBBONS 17 

Statements to MR. WHEELER 17 

Need to Lay More Responsibility on Fish 

and Game 18 

Statements by SENATOR McCORQUODALE re: 

Need for Independent Fish and Game Department 18 

Legislative Support for Department 18 

Problems of the Past 18 

Caltrans Dumping of Asphalt into Stream 19 

Need for Department Game Wardens to 

Feel Support of Agency and Department 19 

Statements by SENATOR BOATWRIGHT re: 

Need to Abolish Departments that Are Not 

Performing 19 

Department of Energy 19 

Commitment to Support Strong Director 20 

Statements by SENATOR CRAVEN re: 

New Spirit of Cooperation within Department 

and Agency 20 

Motion to Confirm 21 

Committee Action 22 



Vll 



INDEX (CONTINUED) 
Statement by SENATOR BEVERLY re: 



3 Presence of SECRETARY WHEELER 22 

4 DAVID M. CAFFREY, Member 

Public Employment Relations Board 23 

5 

6 

7 



Motion to Confirm 23 

Committee Action 24 



A. VERNON CONRAD, Member 

8 California Regional Water Quality Control Board 

Central Valley Region 24 

9 

10 

11 
12 
13 
14 
15 

16 

Opposition to Any Attempts to Reform 

Reclamation Laws 27 



Witnesses in Opposition: 

JOHN KREBS, Former Supervisor 

County of Fresno 25 

Nominee's Lack of Concern for Environment 26 

Approval of All Proposed Developments 26 

Proposed Ball Ranch Development 27 

Opposition to Formation of San Joaquin 

Air Pollution Control Board 27 



Position on U.S. Government Signing 

40-year Contracts with Valley Farmers 28 



18 

19 

LYNN SADLER 

20 Planning and Conservation League 29 

21 Nominee's Belief in Abolishment of CEQA 29 

MICHAEL PAPARIAN 

Sierra Club 29 

23 

24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



Lack of Balance in Appointment 29 

Rebuttal by MR. CONRAD 30 

Never Sought to Abolish CEQA 30 

Ball Ranch Proposal 30 

Golf Course with Housing Unis 30 



Vlll 



INDEX (CONTINUED) 

Attainment of Parkway along River 31 

Inclusive EIR Statement by Developer 31 

Opposition of City of Fresno to 

Project 32 

Adequacy of Water and Sewage for 

Project 32 

Support for Environment 32 

Support, not Opposition, for Air District 33 

Questions by SENATOR MELLO re: 

Quote Made during Board Hearing Concerning 

EIRs 33 

Direct Quote or Out of Context 34 

Provisions of CEQA 35 

Requirement of EIR unless There Is 

Negative Declaration 36 

Request to Any Legislators to Amend, 

Repeal or Modify CEQA 36 

Minutes of Board Meetings 37 

Motion to Confirm 38 

Substitute Motion to Delay Confirmation 

until December Meeting 38 

Discussion 38 

Roll Call 40 

Motion to Move the Call 40 

Discussion 40 

Committee Action 42 

EILEEN E. PADBERG, Member 

Commission on the Status of Women 42 

Background and Experience 42 



I 



IX 



INDEX (CONTINUED) 

Statement by SENATOR MELLO re: 

Request from CONGRESSMAN DORNAN to 

Be Present at Hearing 43 

Witnesses in Support; 

SENATOR BILL LOCKYER 44 

JUDITH RYAN, Retired Judge 

Superior Court 

County of Orange 45 

KAREN PETERS 

National Organization for Women 

Orange County Chapter 46 

DEBORA HINTZ 

National Association of Women Business Owners 

National Women's Political Caucus, Orange County 47 

ROBERT NELSON, President 

Nelson Communications 48 

ALETA CARPENTER 49 

Discussion re: CONGRESSMAN DORNAN 49 

Statements by SENATOR PETRIS re: 

Women Taking Lead in Women's Rights 

Issues under Severe Attack 50 

Quote from New York Times Article, 

Pat Robertson 50 

Motion to Confirm 51 

Committee Action 52 

Termination of Proceedings 52 

Certificate of Reporter 53 



1 

P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 
— 00O00 — 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Now we have two of our Senators who 
wish to testify on one of the hearings which we have today. We 
are going to start with Boyd H. Gibbons III, Director, 
Department of Fish and Game. 

We have with us today Senator Boatwright and Senator 
McCorquodale, who wish to speak at this time. 

Do you want to lead off, Dan, or do you want comments 
from the appointee? 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : I'm not sure whether you 
wanted to have any opening comments, or just want me to go just 
go into it. I'm willing to just start off. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: That's all right. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: I've had a lot of discussions 
with Mr. Gibbons, obviously, over a period of time. We've 
communicated on a lot of issues. He chairs — I mean, he's the 
Director of a department over which my policy committee has 
jurisdiction, as well as I chair the subcommittee, Subcommittee 
2, which has budget responsibilities there. 

And I've been impressed with him in a lot of 
different ways. I think that his intentions are good. I think 
his hopes and aspirations for the Department are good. 

But we've had a lot of directors that fill that 
category in Fish and Game, and Fish and Game, and the activities 
over which they oversee, have deteriorated tremendously in 
California in the last 20-25 years. 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 



28 



So, it seems like at this point we have to either 
turn that Department around, we have to renew our efforts at 
dealing in a more positive and progressive way with the issues 
before the Department of Fish and Game, or else all is lost in 
the area of fish and wildlife. 

This Department is one, it's the only, what we would 
call the environmental protection department in the state. 
Others have some charge to do so; however, that's their 
secondary responsibility. The Department of Water Resources has 
a responsibility to move water around the state and protect 
environment, but obviously, in moving water around the state, 
that's their number one charge. And they do what they can for 
environmental issues, but this Department has it as its number 
one responsibility. 

It surfaced in the last few weeks an issue which I 
will use to illustrate the problems that Mr. Gibbons will face, 
in that the Department of Forestry has proceeded with 
regulations which would require that anyone who addresses or 
comments on a timber harvest plan will have to be licensed or 
certified by the Department of Forestry. 

Now, if you stretch this out to the ultimate, it 
means that any citizen who wants to make a comment on the timber 
harvest plan would have to be licensed by the Department of 
Forestry. I doubt that that's their intention, but certainly 
what their intention is, is to make a decision over which 
biologists they will allow from the — over which biologists 
from the Department of Fish and Game that they will allow to 



3 

4 
5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



3 

make comments on timber harvest plans and operations. 

So, first I'd like to ask Mr. Gibbons if he thinks 
it's appropriate for the Department of Forestry to have 
licensing authority over all biologists working to protect fish 
and wildlife on any wildlands, whether it's timber harvest lands 
or other lands? 

MR. GIBBONS: No, I don't necessarily think that's 
necessary. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : What do you think about them 
having to license any University of California professor who 
might want to make comments on a timber harvest plan? 

MR. GIBBONS: Well, I'm not sure, Senator. I assume 
this is in reference to the existing law? 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: It's regulations which they're 
moving ahead on. Water Board? 

MR. GIBBONS: I haven't looked at the regulations 
themselves, so I don't know how broad they might be. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: I'm amazed at my luck. I was 
here a couple weeks ago, and I asked an appointee to the 
Regional Water Quality Control Board if he had ever made a 
statement, and I read the statement to him. I couldn't believe 
that he would agree that he had. And then he reaffirmed it. 

I can't believe that I would ask Mr. Gibbons this 
question, and he would tell me that he hadn't read it, because 
that's my point. 

Who's going to protect fish and wildlife if the 
Department of Forestry proceeds on and says that Biologist A, 



2 
3 
4 
5 

6 

7 

8 

I 

9 

ii 
il 

10 

ii 

II j, 

ii 
12 

13 

14 || 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



who maybe used to work for the Department of Forestry and 
changed over to the Department of Fish and Game, is the only one 
they will accept as being — as making comments, and that 
biologist is one that's very favorable towards timber 
harvesting, who protects the fish? How do we do this? 

And in my opinion, that's your responsibility. And 
you should be scrambling like mad to keep that from happening, 
because not only me, but a lot of the people who have raised 
questions about your willingness to deal with issues in the 
Department, is whether you have enough clout within the 
Department of Resources to counter the Department of Water 
Resources and the Department of Forestry. 

Can you give us any evidence of your ability to 
counter their clout? There's no question that the Department of 
Forestry and the Department of Water Resources has clout. 

MR. GIBBONS: I'll be — we'll be sitting down with 
them to discuss this with some intensity, obviously. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : Well, last night I got a call 
from the Resources Agency to tell me that your Department didn't 
have a strong position on the language in a bill which would 
make it clear that Forestry does not have licensing authority 
over biologists in your Department. 

Is that a correct representation of your position? 

MR. GIBBONS: Well, I think you're referring to a 
clean-up bill we have that had a bunch of technical amendments, 
and this is a provision — 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: That's not very technical. 



13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
\9 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



5 
It's just plain old English language that says that the 
Department of Forestry can't say who in the Fish and Game 
Department gets to comment on — 

MR. GIBBONS: Right, I was just speaking on — that 
provision, as I understand it, is in a piece of legislation that 
involves a lot of cleanup for us of technical amendments. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : If you don't deal with it in a 
bill, how will you deal with it? 

MR. GIBBONS: Well, we can deal with it in a separate 
bill. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: With a Republican author? 

MR. GIBBONS: I'm sorry? 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: With a Republican author? I 
mean, how would you do it? 

MR. GIBBONS: I'm not sure that the authorship is so 
much the guest ion. It's the substance of the issue that you're 
raising, and I — 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: There won't be any bills that 
can go in until, for now, for another three months. They won't 
get passed; take effect a year and three or four months from 
now. 

What happens in the meantime if the Department tells 
you that you can't — that your biologist can't comment on those 
plans without being licensed by them? 

MR. GIBBONS: Well, we'll be sitting down with the 
Department of Forestry on this. It's not a concluded matter. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: Of course, the way we could 



3 

4 
5 
6 

7 
X 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



6 

deal with it is, we could transfer that responsibility to 
someone else at some point. I guess that's one possibility. 

I just hate to see you going down the road with 
another sort of a wobbling way of looking at the issues, and 
that we would reach this point with this. 

The Department of Forestry, there's no question. I 
mean, that guy's moving ahead. He's going. He's going for the 
jugular on you. You're not going to be able to make any comment 
on timber harvest plans that he doesn't license the person who's 
making those comments. 

Does it make sense to you? 

MR. GIBBONS: No. I don't think that the Board of 
Forestry should be licensing Fish and Game biologists, no. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : Why wouldn't you have raised 
hell about it? 

MR. GIBBONS: I'm sorry? 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: Why wouldn't you have raised 
hell bout it? 

MR. GIBBONS: Well, it'll be something I'll do right 
away . 

This particular matter, in terms of the legislation 
you were referring to, is a side issue, but the substance of the 
issue you're raising, I'm going to sit down with the Department 
of Forestry. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: My jurisdiction and Senator 
Dills' overlapped on the issue of solid waste. You'll remember 
the battle we had for over a year over that issue. I mean, I 



I 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



didn't give up until I really finally got and looked at a 
three-to-two vote on the Rules Committee that did it. 

I mean, it seems to me that you wouldn't give up any 
jurisdiction you had over Fish and Game issues. 

MR. GIBBONS: I haven't given up anything. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : But you are. They've done it 
under law, they think. And they've not been challenged. And 
the only way to stop it is to clarify that they don't have the 
authority to license people. And the Department representative, 
or the Agency representative, told me that your Department 
didn't have a strong position on the language in a bill which 
will make it clear that Forestry does not have licensing 
authority over the biologists in your Department. 

MR. GIBBONS: There may be some confusion about that, 
but in terms of these regulations, whatever stage they're at 
now, we're going to be meeting with the Department of Forestry 
about it. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: Now, the other story that 
we've gotten is that Mr. Sullivan was given the responsibility 
to deal with this, and that his method of dealing with it was to 
decide to let Forestry move ahead and do the licensing of 
people. 

MR. GIBBONS: No, no, no. That's not true. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: That's an absolute not true? 

MR. GIBBONS: The question is whether this particular 
provision in the cleanup bill is going to stall the cleanup 
aspects. And we would — the items that were in the cleanup 



8 
legislation were of a technical matter, and we were simply 
trying to get that out. And apparently CAPS had presented this 
amendment fairly recently, and we did not want the legislation 
stalled over that issue. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : Let me just read one thing, 
and I'll complete my comments here. This is a letter from the 
Licensing Department of the person of the Board of Forestry, and 
he's talking about my bill, Senator Bill 1345, which as you say 
is a cleanup bill dealing with a whole range of issues. And he 
says: 

"Specifically, Section 4 of the bill 
as now written can be read to not 
require Fish and Game biologists to 
have a Forestry license when they 
make recommendations about 
harvesting of trees to provide for 
wildlife habitat across the forest 
landscape. " 
Now, is there any question in your mind the Board of 
Forestry feels very confident that they have the authority to 
license? 

MR. GIBBONS: Well, certainly one staff member does. 
SENATOR McCORQUODALE: Well, this is the Executive 
Officer of Forestry Licensing. 

Have you had a conflict with that person in the past? 

MR. GIBBONS: No, no, I have not. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: Did you win in a conflict with 



I 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
II 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 



that person? 

He's telling me, and he's opposing my bill, you see. 
The Board of Forestry is opposing my bill because of that 
section in there. 

Now, I've been told that the bill has problems, and 
that's the only source of any opposition, the Board of Forestry. 

MR. GIBBONS: I think we can straighten out whatever 
confusion there is. On the merits of it, we didn't want to see 
[the rest of the legislation held up over a dispute over this 
j particular language. 

But I don't believe the licensing authority applies 
to the Fish and Game biologists. I'll certainly resist that. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : Well, Mr. Chairman, I think 
that completes the point I wanted to make. 

I would hope that the Rules Committee would look 
carefully at whether they feel that Mr. Gibbons really has the 
force to carry out the responsibilities of this Department. 
It's a very critical department in California. If you've read 
from probably any paper you can pick up over a period of time, 
the difficulties that wildlife and fish are having to survive in 
California. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: We appreciate your comments, Senator 
McCorquodale . 

It's entirely possible, of course, that Mr. Gibbons 
may follow that old adage of Theodore Roosevelt, "Speak softly 
and carry a big stick." He may not have shown his prowess to 
this time. 



3 

4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
II 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



10 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : I felt better when he had a 
few scars on him when he came in, I guess. 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good. 

MR. GIBBONS: These are fatigues. I wear them 
underneath. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Before we go on, I think the issues 
raised by Senator McCorquodale are pertinent. 

I looked over here. Secretary Wheeler was here, who 
is the head of your Department as well as the Forestry 
Department. For some reason he left about five minutes ago. 

It'd be nice if he were here to hear this interchange 
of discussion, to hear from Senator McCorquodale and others. 

I was wondering through the Chair if the Sergeant 
could call Mr. Wheeler to see if he could come back and 
participate here in the hearing this afternoon for Mr. Gibbons. 
I think that is not an unreasonable request. 

Rather than trying to have Mr. Gibbons trying to 
settle the differences between two agencies within the umbrella 
of Resources, I think Mr. Wheeler ought to be here to get the 
message that he's coming up here, then let him bring everybody 
together and try to come up with a solution. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: You know, it's really a 
broader issue. I didn't try to give you all of it. 

Let me give you one more example. The Department had 
raised a million striped bass by buying them. They bought them 



11 






2 
3 

4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
II 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 



from private contractors. They were supposed to be put out for 
mitigation during June, maybe even before, but anyway, by June. 

They were paid for by the Department of Water 
Resources. Water Resources determined that how Mr. Gibbons used 
the striped bass didn't meet the requirement of mitigation. 

Now, here's a Department that doesn't have the 
responsibility. They're only supposed to pay for them because 
their pumping created problems for striped bass. 

Mr. Gibbons did it. He had about two weeks to pay 
the people who were the private contractors before we ran into 
the problem of registered warrants. 

I still don't know for sure whether those folks ever 
got their money, because they couldn't resolve the issue. 
Nobody could over — he wasn't able to overcome Department of 
Water Resources. 

So it is a critical issue, and it has far-reaching 
ramifications about just the image of whether California has a 
Department that's really fighting to protect the fisheries and 
the wildlife and habitat in California. 

Hopefully, they got those folks paid. I know that he 
got the striped bass distributed, and I didn't have any 
I objection to how he distributed them, but evidently Water 
Resources did. 

i: 

MR. GIBBONS: Well, Senator, let me just say that the 

objection wasn't just from the Department of Water Resources. 
ii 
It was from the fisheries representatives as well on the 

advisory committee, the Four Pumps Advisory Committee that 



2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



12 
advises on mitigation. So, there was not agreement amongst the 
group that advises on the use of mitigation money. 

It was from — all the parties could not reach 
agreement; it wasn't just the Department of Water Resources 
there. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: May we go now to Senator Boatwright. 

SENATOR BOATWRIGHT: Mr. Chairman and Members, I had 
some real misgivings about this appointment, and I have 
discussed several times those misgivings with the nominee as 
Director of Fish and Game. And I still have some misgivings, 
but I think the proof of the pudding is always in the eating. 

I'm going to ask that Boyd Gibbons be given an 
affirmative recommendation out of this Committee. I intend to 
vote for him on the Floor. 

I guess the action will be determined, right or 
wrong, based upon his subsequent actions. 

I think of myself as an environmentalist. I have 
received — the only Legislator to have received a certain award 
from the Sierra Club. 

In addition to that, I am a hunter, a fisherman. I 
mean a real hunter; I hunt big game all over North America. A 
lot of people don't like it, but I do. I don't know of any 
other Legislator since Bill Richardson left that does that. 

I don't think it's mutually inconsistent to be a 
sportsman and also be an environmentalist. I think it goes 
hand-in-hand. Without the environment, you don't have game; you 
don't have migratory waterfowl. 



13 



So, I think he should be confirmed to see how he 
acts. 

But I am going to say this. California's migratory 
waterfowl, California's game, has been in a steady decline. I 
think a lot of that is attributable to the policies of the 
Department of Fish and Game over the many last years. And I can 
cite examples. 

One example that certainly Senator McCorquodale and 
[Senator Petris are well aware of was my Senate Bill 1034, where 
we established a fund to restore the Delta levees, and in that 
bill we gave Fish and Game certain responsibilities with respect 
to the preservation of the habitat on the levees, and things 
like that. 

For several years, the money was spent, and Fish and 
Game never signed off on a single reclamation plan. And as a 
consequence, they were doing the work during the nesting season 
of the birds on the levees; they were destroying the levees. We 
showed a film that you will recall that was taken where they 
were scarifying the land, pushing fence posts and barbed wire, 
pilings, and everything into the waterway and fouling the 
waterway. And I have that, and I'll make it available to you. 

We held up the money of that entire about $150 
million — $12 million or 15 million for a year, until we could 
get a new bill out and a new agreement, a memorandum of 
understanding, to get Fish and Game involved in doing the job 
they're supposed to do. 

So, I'm going to say this, and it's not a threat. I 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



14 
think Senator McCorquodale will back me up. 

As a Member of the Budget Committee, and as a Member 
that did sit on his Subcommittee, now I'm Chairman of a State 
Administration Subcommittee of the Budget, and Senator Petris is 
on Budget and he's Chairman of Education, and I think I can 
safely say that if you really don't carry out the functions, and 
just good common sense will tell you what those are, to protect 
fish and game, and do whatever 's right for fish and game, I'm 
going to do everything that I can to see that the entire 
functions of Fish and Game are transferred to someone else. 

We need to start doing that around here with other 
departments. As a matter of fact, Senator McCorquodale, as 
Chairman of a Subcommittee I appointed of Business and 
Professions to do that with all the boards and commissions, 
he'll hold a hearing this fall and have recommendations next 
year to consolidate and eliminate some of these. And I think 
it'll be adopted. 

I can absolutely tell you, I will push for the 

1 

elimination of Fish and Game and the transfer of its functions 
to some other department. If they're not going to do their job, 
we might as well save money. 

We have discussed this. I think Senator McCorquodale 
will tell you that as Chairman of Natural Resources and Chairman 
of that Subcommittee on the Budget, that you agree with that. 

Is that true? 

SENATOR MCCORQUODALE: That's true. 

SENATOR BOATWRIGHT: So, that's not a threat, but if 



2 
3 

4 
5 
6 

7 



9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



15 
you're not going to do your job, there's no use putting the 
money into your job and into Fish and Game. We'll let someone 
else do it. 

So, I'm going to support your confirmation. I'm 
going to vote for it. I think you deserve a chance; everyone 
does. 

But the proof of the pudding's in the eating. And if 
you, as a Director, do your job, I'll go to the mat for you. 
I'll fight every other department, anyone that I can, to make 
sure that you do your job if you're willing to stand up and 
fight for yourself. 

So, that's what I want to tell this Committee. And 
there's another sportsman here. Senator Mello is a very avid 
fisherman. I think he feels very strongly about this, and a 
hunter, too, a duck hunter. 

But we feel strongly about this. I think we've had a 
weak Fish and Game Department for a long time. And the proof is 
that in 1034, they didn't do anything for several years. 

So, I think you deserve a chance. I'm going to vote 
for you. I'm going to support you, and I think that's the fair 
way to do it. And then the ball is in your court. 

MR. GIBBONS: Thank you, Senator. 

SENATOR MELLO: Mr. Chairman. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: May I respond to my dear friend and 
colleague. 

He made some very strong words there about this 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



16 
Department, but let me just suggest that there is a different 
alternative. 

I was thinking, who do we abolish them and merge them 
into? Like, if you put them into Forestry, boy, you're putting 
the fox in with the chickens. If you put them to — what other 
departments are there out there? 

SENATOR BOATWRIGHT: Parks and Recreation. 

SENATOR MELLO: Let me suggest this — 

SENATOR BOATWRIGHT: They do a pretty good job 
protecting the environment. 

SENATOR MELLO: I'd rather see us take a different 
approach. You and Senator McCorquodale have this great power 
with your subcommittees, and I commend you for what you're 
doing. 

But let's get this Department to work, be responsive 
to the needs of California. To me, that's better because they 
can focus on fish and game management a lot better than putting 
them into a department that's going to have Fish and Game, and 
Parks, or Forestry, or Aging, or Agriculture, whatever else you 
want to do, that'll have these self-imposed conflicts, I think. 

I would rather see Mr. Gibbons and Mr. Wheeler — I 
wish he was here to hear this, because he was here earlier — 
but what I'd rather see this Department do, because I agree with 
you, the resources have been going downhill. I mean, I've got 
graph that shows resources going like this, and the fishing 
licenses for fishing and game are going like that, and we are 
picking up about 90 percent of the costs of running this 



2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



17 

i 

Department. That's why Senator Bergeson's resolution here 
jpassed here earlier. People can enjoy the environment and see 
wildlife, and see a lot of things, as long as we are paying for 
it. The commercial section is paying for part of their 
operation as well. 

But I'd rather see us not put a conflict in with 
merging this Department some other entity. I'd rather say to 
Mr. Gibbons and Mr. Wheeler, "Look, we have to do better 
resource management. We have to do more about the water uses. 
We have to do more about protection of the habitat, the 
wetlands, and the whole fishery management." 

Then with your positions there, and your budget 
department, lay it on the line. Let them do it, and if they 
can't do it, then — ah, Mr. Wheeler. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE : Senator Mello — 

SENATOR MELLO: May I just, with the permission of 
the Committee, Mr. Wheeler, I saw you earlier, and I know your 
busy engagements. 

Some very important information came here that I do 
not want to go back and repeat on, but I hope you can read the 
transcript that'll be available here that reflects Senator 
McCorquodale's concerns and Senator Boatwright bout conflicts 
that are coming up between the Department of Forestry and Fish 
land Game. Because you are the boss. You're at the head of all 
these agencies, and I think it's a very valid concern that we 
all have. 

We've been laying the blame on Mr. Gibbons here and 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



18 
other people, but somehow I think you're part of the solution. 
Hopefully, you can be here to hear the rest of this confirmation 
hearing. 

At least, Mr. Chairman, my point that I want to make 
to Senator Boatwright, who I respect a lot, and Senator 
McCorquodale, before we start transferring this Department into 
somebody else, we ought to first look at laying more 
responsibility on them, and helping them get their job done to 
the best way we can. 

SENATOR McCORQUODALE: Senator Mello, I certainly 
agree with that. I think that it's good to have an independent, 
stand-alone Department, dealing with the issues that they deal 
with. 

I think that part of what Mr. Gibbons gets tired with 
here is that — is the sins of the past, as much as they are of 
his. And that's why I think it was important for me to come 
today and raise this issue with him, because I wanted him to 
know that there is legislative support. There's public support 
for him doing his work in this area. But there is a lot that 
needs to be done. 

I'll give you one more example of a problem that 
existed. He can't be blamed for it because it happened about 
the time he got here. 

Among a lot of the lower ranking people, there is a 
feeling among game wardens and others, biologists and others, 
that there's not full Department support and Agency support for 
their activities, even to the extent that when Caltrans dumped a 



12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 



19 
load of asphalt into a stream, that rather than go through the 
process of sending it up through the channels and having it 
dealt with administratively, the game warden felt his only 
option was to go to the local district attorney and file a 
lawsuit or file criminal charges against Caltrans in dealing 
with it. 

We don't — we shouldn't operate that way. They 
should have confidence that if they'd had sent that up to the 
head of Fish and Game, that Fish and Game would have taken it to 
whatever mediation process is available within the 
administration to deal with it, and feeling that they could 
have gotten successful resolution that would protect fish in 
this case, but they didn't. 

So, that's the challenge that he has, to be able to 
do that. As Senator Boatwright said, I think he has the 
training, the capability, the background, the interest, and 
everything else. He needs to know that people are supporting — 
supportive of him, and he needs to know that he has 
administration support, and he needs to know that occasionally 
he's got to battle some of these other departments, and if he 
loses, he loses. But we've got to know that he's out there 
fighting the battles that we would pick for him. 

SENATOR BOATWRIGHT: The reason I said that about 
that, if they're not doing their job, there's no use having any 
department or agency in. 

I think we're close on the Energy Department. I 
think their life, for example, if they go another year it's 



20 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



going to be pretty lucky. I think there's damn near unanimous 

'i consent in all the people on the conference committee to abolish 

I! 

the Energy Commission and transfer its siting functions to the 

PUC. 

So, if someone's not doing their job, why keep them 

| around? That's why I say that. You know, what the hell? If 

il 

Jit's just to spend money, we can all do that. Like, you know, 

and we've made some pretty good strides: OPR's gone, OPA's 

gone, the Mexican Affairs group is gone. And I think it's time 

that government became efficient. I think the people out there 

want us to spend our money more wisely. 

So, I just — I think he can do it, and you'll sure 
get my support if you try. And if we have to fight Mr. Wheeler, 
we'll do that, too, for you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Well, would you like to hear 
something favorable? 

SENATOR BOATWRIGHT: That was all favorable. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Dan said that was all favorable. 
You may need a translator to come up with that. 

I'm sure that both Senators are very, very well- 
intentioned. I have a feeling, too, that they've gone into this 
situation quite well. 

But my thought is that you may well be the spark that 
ignites a new spirit of cooperation and understanding within the 

Department and the Agency, and who's to say that that is not 

i 

correct. 

So, we're all entitled to our opinions. I have found 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



21 
that in dealing with people in your milieu, going back before I 
was in state service and county service, we had trouble with 
people agreeing within the various elements of Parks, and 
[Recreations, and this and that, and so forth, and so much of 
what Senator McCorguodale said I've heard before in a different 
setting with a different uniform on, but it was there 
nonetheless. So, nothing is perfect, I suppose, except the 
Members of the Rules Committee, who are now going to vote. 

Any comment by the Members? We had testimony last 
time Mr. Gibbons was with us. Unless you have any feeling that 
we should have more, let's bring this to a vote. 

SENATOR MELLO: Let me ask, is there anyone that has 
any new information that might be part of this hearing? I don't 
want to just open up the hearing. 

I don't recall how we even left it, whether or not 
the hearing was closed. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: It appears that no one is reacting 
to the inquiry of Senator Mello. Let us presume, then, that 
there is no one who wishes to make any comment. 

The Chair is ready to receive a motion. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I move we recommend confirmation. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Beverly moves the 
confirmation of Boyd H. Gibbons III, Director, Department of 
Fish and Game. 

Call the roll, please. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 



I 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



you 



Committee. 



22 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 

Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 

Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

Senator Roberti. 

Four to zero. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Four-zero; congratulations and thank 

MR. GIBBONS: Thank you very much, all Members of the 



[Thereupon the final vote for 
confirmation was 5-0, as Senator 
Roberti ' s aye vote was added 
pursuant to Senate Rule 28.7] 
SENATOR BEVERLY: Mr. Chairman, may the record show 
that Secretary Wheeler's here. There was a request that he 
appear. He was summoned, I gather. He's not in shackles; he's 
not under subpoena, but he's here. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: You're here of your own volition. 
Nice to have you with us. 

SECRETARY WHEELER: Thank you. 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



23 

SENATOR CRAVEN: We appreciate your presence. 

All right, let's go back to Item 1, Governor's 
appointees, David M. Caffrey, Member, Public Employment 
Relations Board. Mr. Caffrey was with us before. We voted, as 
I recall, favorably, and then Senator Petris asked that we put 
the matter over because of certain information that he had 
either received or was seeking. That's why this gentleman is 
back before us again. 

Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Mr. Chairman, I had a talk with 
Mr. Caffrey, and he answered the questions I had. So, I'm ready 
to go. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very well. 

MS. MICHEL: You rescinded the action that you took 
and put it over . 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Then we're ready for a motion. 

MS. MICHEL: Senator Petris had made the motion last 
week. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Move. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Petris has moved the 
confirmation of David M. Caffrey, Member, Public Employment 
Relations Board. 

Call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 

21 

j 

22 
23 
24 
25 
26 

28 



24 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 

Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 

Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

Senator Roberti. 

Four to zero. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good. Congratulations, 
Mr. Caffrey, and thank you very much for coining back. 

MR. CAFFREY: Thank you. 

[Thereupon the final vote for 
confirmation was 5-0, as Senator 
Roberti' s aye vote was added 
pursuant to Senate Rule 28.7] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Next we have A. Vernon Conrad, 
Member, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central 
Valley Region. 

The Supervisor's been with us before, as I recall. 
We had a two-two vote on it, then what did we do? 

SECRETARY WEBB: We announced the vote, and then 
reconsideration was granted. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: There are people who wish to testify 
in this case. 

First of all, thank you for coming back again. 



I 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 



10 
11 
12 
13 

14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



25 

We have a person who wishes to testify on this matter 
before us, on Mr. Conrad, John Krebs. Mr. Krebs, as I 
understand, is a former Supervisor, Fresno County. 

MR. KREBS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the 
Board, of the Committee. 

My name is John Krebs, and let me state at the outset 
that I did not cherish the task of appearing here in opposition 
to the nomination of Supervisor Craven [sic] . 

SENATOR CRAVEN: There was a Supervisor Craven. 

MR. KREBS: Excuse me, I served with Mr. Craven, so 
excuse my slip here. 

I came here as a private citizen, a person who served 
for five years on the Fresno County Board of Supervisors, and 
for four years in the House of Representatives. And as such, 
I believe I have established records on the environment which, 
frankly, show concern for the environment, and that's the reason 
why I'm here today. 

As I said, it is not a pleasant task to oppose 
Mr. Conrad. I've had a pleasant relationship with Mr. Conrad. 
We did not serve on the Board at the same time. Mr. Conrad was 
elected to the Board after I was elected to the House of 
Representatives. And as I said, my reasons for being here are 
strictly from the standpoint of a citizen who, frankly, feel 
that the appointment of Mr. Conrad to this particular Board 
would be inappropriate. 

I am saying this because I am naive enough to feel 
that a person who seeks appointment to a Water Quality Control 



1 

2 j 

3 ! 
4 

5 
6 

7 ii 



9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



26 

Board, and I happen to think that water in this state ranks in 

importance with the economy and with crime — as a matter of 

fact, I believe a case can be made that unless we do something 

about the problems facing California as far as the water supply 

is concerned and the quality of water, our economy is going to 

go down rather than, as all of us hope, ultimately go up. 
i 

With this in mind, let me tell you why I'm opposing 

Mr. Conrad's nomination. 

Mr. Conrad, in his ten years on the Board of 
Supervisors, has established a record of a person who simply 
does not seem to feel that a concern for the environment is 
something that a member of the Board of Supervisors should be 
aware of. The record, I believe, is clear that Mr. Conrad, and 
I regret to put it in these terms, that Mr. Conrad, based on my 
observations, has never seen a development that he did not like, 
unless it happened to be in his district where opposition 
exists. When it comes to any other Supervisorial district, 
anything goes. 

We have had numerous instances of approval by the 
Board of Supervisors, with Mr. Conrad voting in the affirmative, 
of developments, leapfrog subdivisions, without adequate water 
and without adequate sewage provisions, without adequate EIRs. 
I can cite you examples. The most recent one, probably the most 
blatant in recent times, and I can cite you additional examples. 
In all candor, they probably won't mean anything to you, 
understandably so. 

The most blatant one was a development, proposed 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
II 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



27 
development, of the Ball Ranch. The Ball Ranch is in the San 
Joaquin River flood plain. It was strenuously opposed, not 
only by the staff, but it was opposed by what is known as the 
San Joaquin River Committee. It is — the committee represents 
a broad section of the population in Fresno in its attempt, and 
it's not an easy task, to develop a parkway along the San 
Joaquin River. 

The development that was proposed by those who 
purchased, or at least conditionally purchased, the property 
from the Ball family, involved in excess of 900 units. It 
finally was approved recently, within the last three weeks, on a 
four-to-one vote, with Mr. Conrad voting in the affirmative, 
with 75 units. 

Mr. Conrad was willing from the beginning to approve 
what would have been really a death blow to any attempt to 
develop the San Joaquin Parkway. 

Mr. Conrad has consistently opposed the formation of 
a San Joaquin Regional Air Control — Air Pollution Control 
Board under the legislation of your colleague, Senator 
McCorquodale. It is my understanding that Fresno County is in 
violation of Senate Bill 124, which deals with that particular 
district. I understand that a hearing will be heard for the 
purpose of deciding whether sanctions should be imposed within 
the next day or so. 

Mr. Conrad has made it clear that his philosophy on 
water development in California is in or has been consistent 
with opposition to any attempts to reform the reclamation laws. 



28 



And Mr. Conrad is of the opinion that the United 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



States government should sign 4 0-year contracts with farmers in 
the San Joaquin Valley, despite the fact that we are about to 
undergo some very serious population changes in the State of 
California. And I cannot believe that anybody representing an 
urban district, let alone a district in areas like the Los 
Angeles Basin, the Bay Area, would not be concerned about 
individuals who have never contributed a dime to the development 
of water resources, being able to sign 40-year contracts. 

I know your time is short, and I wish to apologize 
for the time that I already took, and I probably spoke longer 
than I did [sic] . 

I wish to thank you for the opportunity of having 
appeared before you. I'm now open to any questions which you 
might have. 

Let me reiterate in closing, as I stated at the 
outset, that this is not a pleasant task. If Mr. Conrad was up 
for appointment for certain agricultural committees, which did 
not involve air or water, I would be more than happy to support 
him. 

I certainly bear no animosity to Mr. Conrad. I was 
never involved in any of his campaigns, and to my knowledge, he 
was never involved in any of my campaigns. 

I'm doing it strictly because of my deep concern for 
the environment. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very well, thank you very much. 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



29 

MR. KREBS: Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Any Member of the Committee wish to 
speak to that witness on any of his points? 

We'll give you, Supervisor Conrad, an opportunity to 
rebut at the conclusion of the testimony. 

Yes, ma'am. You have some comment to make? If you 
will come forward and state your name. 

MS. SADLER: My name is Lynn Sadler. I'm with the 
Planning and Conservation League. 

We've been receiving a number of FAXes from the 
groups that we deal with in the area that he currently serves, 
asking us to urge you to strongly oppose his confirmation. 

It can basically be summed up, as one person said, 
he's indicated in the past that he believes CEQA should be 
abolished, and then he proceeds to vote as if it already had 
been. 

We are in strong opposition to his confirmation and 
ask that you oppose it as well. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much. 

Yes, sir. 

MR. PAPARIAN: Mr. Chairman, Members, Mike Paparian, 
representing the Sierra Club. 

On behalf of our local chapter, which covers the 
region, we strongly oppose this nomination. 

And also, based on some of the information that 
you've heard today and at your last hearing, I think it's very 
clear that we don't have a balance in this appointment. We have 



2 

3 

i 

4 
5 

6 

I 

7 

8 

9 

10 



12 

13 
14 
15 
16 

17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 

26 

i 
I 

27 
28 



30 
extremism when it comes to environmental issues, which would not 
be appropriate on this Regional Water Board. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you, Mr. Paparian. 

Anyone else? Any Members of the Committee? 

Mr. Conrad, please. 

MR. CONRAD: Mr. Chairman, fellow Senators, it almost 
takes me by surprise when people make statements of what I 
believe and what I don't believe. And I take strong issue with 
that. 

I have never made any effort or suggested that CEQA 
not be enforced. It is my belief that before any body that has 
a regulatory role should have all of the information brought 
before it before that — decisions are made. I have supported 
that. I have supported it strongly. 

Now, maybe I have not supported the direction that 
some folks would like to have been supported. I'd like to talk 
a little bit about the Ball Ranch. 

The Ball Ranch is a rather large mined out area along 
the San Joaquin River between Friant and Fresno. It was mined 
out in the period of time that was not — we didn't have laws 
that required reclamation of that land. 

This project that was brought forward was a golf 

course with a number of housing units. It was — part of this 

was in the flood plain. Like Mr. Krebs stated, it was all in 

the flood plain, that is not correct, 
j 

Through some negotiations and, I believe, Assemblyman 

Costa has been a strong supporter of the parkway along the 



1 

2 
3 

4 

I 

5 |j 
6 
7 I 



8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



31 
River, of which if you want to go back and check my records, 
that I have supported that as well. It's on the record. 

Maybe one way of attaining it would be to do one 
direction; another way of attaining it would go another 
direction. 

It's been my strong feeling that in order to attain 
it, we could not utilize public monies to buy the land because 
we don't have public monies. But if it is developed, the 
property can then, or a certain segment of that property, can be 
required of the developer. 

The developer did offer a large portion of the land 
along the River. He offered to maintain it in perpetuity, grant 
public access, and provide fencing, and so forth, that the — 
that would be required to have that as a segment of the parkway. 
I supported that. 

Along with that, then the developer would have had — 
in order to get something out of it, would have had to have 
gotten development rights. That was turned down. 

So then the developer, working with various 
governmental agencies, sold them the land that he would have 
given them, and sold them all the environmentally sensitive land 
in that project. Then he came to the Board with environmental 
— the most inclusive environmental impact statement that I have 
seen in the ten years that I have been on the Board. Ream after 
ream of paper from qualified people, providing all of the 
information as to how the environment was to be affected, the 
mitigation measures, and all of those things put together was, 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



32 
in my opinion, that a golf course along in that stretch of the 
bottom of the River, not in the flood plain, would be 
complementary to the parkway. In fact, the parkway even 
suggests — the parkway plan even suggests golf courses be 
built. 

The real issue in this program was that the City of 
Fresno opposed it strongly. And the County and the City are not 
always on the same wave length in our feelings, right or wrong. 
I think in the reference to this same project earlier, it was 
without — reference was made it didn't have adequate water; it 
didn't have adequate sewage. That is totally untrue. 

The requirements for this unit is to have tertiary 
treated sewage. The sewage will be utilized on the golf course, 
and there is adequate water. 

Now, I can go on for a long time and address all of 
these issues that have been brought forth, but I want to assure 
you, all of you Senators, that I believe — I am a farmer, and I 
live by the environment. My livelihood is dependent upon the 
environment. I have been a hunter; I've been a fisherman all my 
life. And I know that we cannot depreciate that resource and 
still have a good quality of life in this area. 

Now, there are different ways of achieving goals, and 
my way may not be exactly the same way as some others, but I 
want to assure you that I am very concerned about the 
environment. I was the first one on the Board of Supervisors in 
Fresno County that embraced vehicle — testing of the vehicles 
for smog. 



33 
And my ex-colleague here says that I was opposed to 
the air district. That is not the case. I am not opposed to an 
air district, and I have supported it. Being a farmer, I know 
what the depreciation of the air guality does, and quality of 
product that I raise. I know what it does to the health of 
people. 

And I resent people coming and saying that I have 
done things that I have not done. 

I have done some things that I — like all people, I 
have made mistakes. But I have not made the mistakes that have 
been brought before you today. 
Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Fine, thank you. 
Any comments? Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Question regarding your recent 
statement about your strong support of the environment. 

I want to go back to the quote that was said before, 
and I think what you're saying now is in conflict, at least what 
you said before, the quote taken from Page 13 of the official 
records of the hearing of the Board on which you serve quotes 
you, it says: 

"Well, Mr. Chairman, I'm going to 
second that motion. And I think 
this matter of requiring an EIR is 
fine if you want to hassle people, 
create as much problems for them as 
you possibly can. I think that's 



I 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 

11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



34 
one way of doing it. I think it's 
used almost on every project with 
that purpose in mind." 

MR. CONRAD: Can I comment on that, sir? 

SENATOR MELLO: This is a quote. 

MR. CONRAD: I said that. I admitted that I said 



that. 



It was taken out of context. It was on an issue that 
we had reams of environmental investigation. 

SENATOR MELLO: Hold it. Let me ask you a question. 

Is this statement taken out of context, or is this 
your direct quote? 

MR. CONRAD: That is a direct quote. What I'm 
talking about is what happened before that and after that. 

There was a great deal of environmental investigation 
had gone forth. There were a lot of other very similar projects 
in similar areas. 

One way, if you want to kill projects, one way is to 
just continue to file lawsuits and complain that your 
environmental investigation is not adequate. Now, who's to say 
whether it's adequate or not until a judge makes a decision. 

I believe the California Environmental Quality Act 
puts the burden on the agency that is making that decision as to 
determine whether it's adequate or not. If they determine it's 
adequate, then it depends upon the court. If the court says 
that they made a mistake, they can rule otherwise. 

But otherwise, that determination is made by the body 



35 
that has the responsibility, in this case the Board of 
Supervisors. 

SENATOR MELLO: Well, I think, it just happened I 
served eight years on a Board of Supervisors, too. 

The California Environmental Quality Act was, is 
there, and it provides that the local agency can make a negative 
declaration. In other words, you don't find any social or 
economic impacts. That sets the procedure. That can be 
challenged, but at least you have that option. 

Secondly, if there is social and economic impact from 
a project, then you have mitigation measures to mitigate these, 
and then the final decision rests with the Board. 

Now, if you haven't followed due process, or if 
you've made mitigation measures that are not relevant to the 
impacts stated by the environmental impact report, then that can 
be further contested in court. 

But I think the burden of proof is strictly on those 
that are protesting a project, because they have to prove, and 
you have the Board, the governing board that you served on, has 
all the options of negative declaration, mitigation measures, 
and findings. And then, when you make the final findings, 
there's, I think, a 45-day window before it becomes final. 

But going back to that one sentence, 

"I think this matter of requiring 
an EIR is fine if you want to 
hassle people ...." 
Well, to me that's — 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



36 

MR. CONRAD: My intent in that matter of requiring an 
EIR in this particular — in that particular project would have 
strictly been a hassle. We had gone through the environmental 
investigation stage of it. We had done that. And these folks 
came and were demanding that we do an EIR. 

It was a difference of opinion as to whether the 
environmental investigation was adequate or not. 

SENATOR MELLO: The EIR, as I understand it, is 
required unless you make a negative declaration. 

MR. CONRAD: We made a negative declaration. That's 
the point. And that was not — it did not satisfy those folks. 

SENATOR MELLO: Have you ever asked your Legislators 
to amend or repeal or modify the California Environmental 
Quality Act? 

MR. CONRAD: No, sir, I have not. And I don't 
believe — I believe it's a pretty good act. 

As I said earlier, I think what Mr. Krebs said in his 
opening remarks were almost identical to the remarks that I made 
in my opening remarks. 

SENATOR MELLO: The reason I brought this up is, you 
made some positive statements there about you being a farmer, 
and a strong environmentalist, and so forth. 

When you go back and re-read this one sentence, it 
sort of conflicts with your stated position just made recently. 

MR. CONRAD: I'm sure, Senator, that, you know, all 
of us, if you could go back and take something out of context 
that we've said, you can make it say almost anything. 



II 

37 
1 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 j 
II 
28 



But I want to assure you that I have no concern about 
the California Environmental Quality Act, and it's the way that 
it's — 

SENATOR MELLO: Let me ask you another question. 

When there's a Board hearing, the clerk of the Board 
takes minutes? 

MR. CONRAD: Yes. 

SENATOR MELLO: Then at a subsequent meeting, the 

matter on the agenda is the approval of the minutes taken at the 

l 

previous meeting; is that correct? 

MR. CONRAD: Not at our Board meetings. 

SENATOR MELLO: How do you approve the minutes? 

MR. CONRAD: We don't. 

SENATOR MELLO: You don't approve them? 

MR. CONRAD: No. 

SENATOR MELLO: I don't know, it varies from board to 
board, then. On our board, we were sort of behind times, but — 

MR. CONRAD: That's Roberts Rules of Order, but we 
don't. 

SENATOR MELLO: What we did, the hearing was all 
transcribed, and then the clerk of the Board typed up minutes 
that we were given copies of with our agenda, and we looked them 
over, and if there were any errors or omissions, then that was 
brought up during that agenda item, approval of the previous 
meeting's minutes. And if there were errors, we corrected them. 

The reason I'm asking, I'm wondering whether or not 
you asked this to be corrected. But, I guess, if you don't 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



38 
approve the minutes — 

MR. CONRAD: I'm not saying that it was an error, 
Senator. 

I said that, and I said that in that context. 

SENATOR MELLO: Thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you. 

We've heard testimony, actually two times, so I think 
we've had enough statement by Supervisor Conrad. 

I think we're ready for a vote. Do I hear a motion? 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I move we recommend confirmation. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Beverly moves — 

SENATOR MELLO: Substitute motion. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: State your motion, please. 

SENATOR MELLO: Substitute motion would be that we 
delay Mr. Conrad's hearing until the Rules Committee hearing to 
be held in December, when we come back in session. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Which would be around the 5th of 
December? 

SENATOR MELLO: It's the first week. When do we come 
back? 

MR. BERG: The first Monday in December. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: As I recall, Mr. Conrad would fall 
within that time parameter, would he not? 

MS. MICHEL: We have until the 30th of December. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: All right. 

Well, we've heard the motion, the substitute motion, 
of Senator Mello. Let's call the roll on that. 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 | 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



39 
SENATOR BEVERLY: Let me inquire first. 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Yes, Senator Beverly. 
SENATOR BEVERLY: When the Rules Committee meets in 

December, I assume it'll be a new Rules Committee, a new Senate, 

new session. 

Am I correct? 

|i 

MR. BERG: I'm not anticipating any changes in the 
Rules Committee, no. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Just as a matter of legality, can 
we do that? Do we have to start all over again? 

We can't carry a bill over into the next — 

MR. BERG: Actually, the Senate Rules Committee 
carries over. 

MS. MICHEL: And appointees are not determined by a 
legislative calendar. It's the yearly calendar of their 365 
days. 

We have carried people over in the past. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: So, what you're saying in connection 
with what Senator Beverly said is that there would be no 
impediment to what Senator Mello's substitute motion has — 

MS. MICHEL: Not from past experience, sir. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Okay, very good. 

Senator Beverly, did you move? 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I made the original motion. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: You did, the original motion, then 
the substitute motion by Senator Mello. 

Call the roll. 



I 

2 
3 
4 
5 

6 

7 

8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 



40 

SENATOR MELLO: This is on the substitute motion. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Right. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 

Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 

Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: No. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven No. 

Senator Roberti. 

Two to one. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Move a call. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Senator Beverly moves a call. 

MS. MICHEL: Just so you understand, Senator Roberti 
will be unable to come in today because of budget negotiations. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: That's one reason I made the 
motion to move the call. 

SENATOR MELLO: I move the call be taken up right 



now. 



up, 



right? 



SENATOR BEVERLY: We have other business to be taken 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Yes, we have. 

SENATOR MELLO: We're not announcing the vote, then; 

SENATOR CRAVEN: No. 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



41 

SENATOR MELLO: I'd like to withdraw my motion, then, 
and we go back to the main motion. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Wait a minute. We were in the 
middle of a roll call, and there's been a call. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I don't know that we can do what 
you're suggesting, Henry. I think your call on this item will 
take precedence. 

SENATOR MELLO: Listen, in this business you have to 
act one way or the other. Now, if you want to postpone this 
motion that I made, he'll be taken up in December. If you don't 
want to postpone it, then Senator Beverly's motion is before the 
House. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I want to think about it for a 



moment . 



SENATOR MELLO: Okay. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Is that a courtesy, to let me think 



about it? 



SENATOR MELLO: Go ahead, think about it. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I think we're taking action 
immediately, just moving the man's confirmation off to December. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: I'm going to have this letter of 
Dirk Poeschel, which is very laudatory of Mr. Conrad, put in the 
record. The letter speaks highly of his abilities, as well as 
rebutting testimony heard by this Committee at a prior time. 

We'll take a break. Let's take ten. 
[Thereupon a brief recess was taken.] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Let's go back in session. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



42 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to lift the 
call on the Conrad motion. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very well. 

Call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Robert i. 

Three to one. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Three to one, so Senator Mello's 
motion carried. 

SECRETARY WEBB: To consider him in December. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: So the end result of that is that 
the matter's carried over until the first week in December. I 
can't give you the date, but I think that's what it is. 

MS. MICHEL: Whenever Rules meets in December. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Yes, whenever we meet, very good. 
Hopefully, we're not still working on the budget at that time. 

Number four, this is Eileen E. Padberg, who's a 
Member of the Commission on the Status of Women, Governor's 
appointee. 

Ms. Padberg, please come forward and tell us why you 
feel you're qualified for this appointment. 

MS. PADBERG: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and 
Members of the Senate Rules Committee. 

I'm Eileen Padberg. A couple of you here know me. 
It's nice to see old friends. I haven't been here in the State 



I 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



43 
Capitol in many years. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: It hasn't changed an awful lot. 

MS. PADBERG: No, it hasn't; you're right. 

I'm here today, ironically, on Women's Equality Day, 
to ask for your support for my confirmation for the Commission 
on the Status of Women. 

I am President of Eileen Padberg Consulting, which is 
an organization that runs campaigns, and does a lot of 
political-corporate communications . 

I have worked on behalf of women since 1974 or '75 — 
it's been so long, I don't know — both on the issues, 
obviously, of women's equality, Equal Rights Amendment, the 
issues of choice, and various other issues that affect women, 
children, and the issues that affect pay equity. 

I'd like to ask for your support. I think that 

li 

certainly I can serve honorably on the Commission. I was 
honored by the Governor to have been asked. 

If you have any questions, I'd be glad to answer 
them. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Well, let me ask. Senator Mello, 
have you any questions at this time? 

SENATOR MELLO: I was just reading the file. It says 
that Congressman Dornan wanted to come here. I guess he's not 
going to be here. 

MS. PADBERG: It's unfortunate. 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you, Henry, for that bit of 



44 

I 



2 
3 

4 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



information. 

SENATOR MELLO: I'm just reading from the file here: 
"I request to be there to testify." 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Well, his plane probably was 
delayed, or something. 

Senator Lockyer is here, and he would like to say a 
few words. 

SENATOR LOCKYER: I'm sure it was a B-l bomber that 
we're awaiting. 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR LOCKYER: Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. 

I've known Ms. Padberg for approximately 15 years. 
As most of us will recall, she lobbied for the Orange County 
Public Employees for a time, and I think all of us found her to 
be an aggressive and effective person in that capacity. 

For many years, she's been a campaign manager, and 
I've had numerous opportunities to debate and discuss campaigns, 
generally ones about which I was on the other side, but learned 
and found her to be an intelligent person, and effective, and 
committed. 

All of that time, all of those years, I observed a 
commitment that was consistent to equal treatment for women, and 
it seems to me most appropriate and fitting that the Governor 
nominate her for service on the Commission on the Status of 
Women . 

I would urge you to confirm the nomination. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good, thank you very much, 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



45 
Senator Lockyer. 

Now I understand, Ms. Padberg, that you have some 
people in the audience who'd like to testify? 

MS. PADBERG: Yes. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: First, Judy Ryan, who is a candidate 
for office, I guess, in the 46th Congressional District. 

Is that right? 

MS. RYAN: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and honorable 
Members . 

My name is Judith Ryan. I'm a retired Superior Court 
Judge from Orange County, and I am here in support of Eileen 
because I think, in part, she's here because of me. 

I did run for congressional office. I ran in the 
primary against Congressman Dornan. And at the time I 
announced, and Eileen announced that she was going to support 
and be my consultant, she was hit with a barrage of attacks. 

I have known Eileen for approximately ten years, 
primarily by reputation, and really until the campaign, had not 
had the opportunity to work with her. And I found that 
everything that I had heard by reputation was true. 

She is known not only within the County, within the 
state, but nationwide, and enjoys a reputation. Not only is she 
well liked, but I think more importantly, she is well respected. 
She's known for her intelligence and her integrity. 

She is not afraid to speak out on issues involving 
not only women, but other issues, I think, that are pertinent. 

I would urge you, despite if it was a transgression 



1 

2 

I 

I 

3 

4 
5 
6 

7 

8 

I 
9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 

26 

[I 
27 

28 



46 

ito act as my consultant, to consider her qualifications and her 
past service to government, and urge her re-appointment to this 
Commission. 

I thank you for the opportunity of speaking. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much for being here. 

Next is Karen Peters. 

MS. PETERS: Thank you much, Mr. Chairman and 
honorable Members of the Senate Rules Committee. 

My name is Karen Peters, and I'm here as an 
individual as well as representative of the County of Orange — 
Orange County NOW, National Organization for Women. 

I've known Eileen since the early '70s, when we 
worked on issues such as pay equity, on the Equal Rights 
Amendment, and on the woman's right to choose. We have been 
friends and partners in trying to change the face of America to 
make sure that women get and receive the recognition that they 
deserve. 

She has been a staunch supporter of women's rights 
and also an advocate. I worked with her as my capacity as the 
Treasurer of ERA Orange County. I have also worked with her in 
my capacity as past President of California National 
Organization for Women. 

Our most recent campaign together was for a 
pro-choice Republican candidate, Judy Ryan. I must say that 
throughout that campaign, and I happen to be a registered 
Democrat, we supported a woman who was a good candidate and who 
believed in women's rights, and was an advocate for all of us. 



47 
Eileen's personal ethics are above reproach, even 
when she has been severely baited by the opposition. She has 
kept a clear head at all times, and she has never allowed 
pettiness to come — become a mode of operation in any campaign 
that I've worked with her on. 

6 

She treats people with dignity and respect, and thus 



l 
2 

3 
5 



7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



has gained the loyalty of everyone who knows her. I truly 
admire and respect Eileen Padberg as a person, as a woman, and 
as a friend. 

I can truly say that with a person like Eileen 
Padberg on your side, you do not have to worry about covering 
your flank or covering your rear. You can go forward with your 
action plan. 

I heartily recommend that Eileen be confirmed as a 
member of the State Commission on the Status of Women. She will 
be a very worthy representative of women in this state. 

Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify on 
her behalf. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you, Ms. Peters, very much. 

We have your letter, which will be put as part of the 
record. I have also one from the Department of Commerce, 
addressed to our Chairman, David Roberti, from Julie Meier 
Wright, and that will also be inserted into the record. 

Next we have Debora Hintz, H-i-n-t-z. 

MS. HINTZ: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Committee 
Members . 

My name is Debora Hintz. I own a couple of companies 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



48 
in Orange County. I'm also here representing the National 
Association of Women Business Owners and National Women's 
Political Caucus in Orange County. 

Not only personally, but representing hundreds of 
women, we all admire and respect Eileen Padberg. Many women 
look to her as a role model, and we feel that there is no one 
more deserving for this position on this Commission. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: National Association for — 

MS. HINTZ: Women Business Owners. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Oh, Business Owners is part of that 
| title? 

MS. HINTZ: Yes, that's another. I happen to be the 
Chair of their Government and International Affairs Committee. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good. 

MS. HINTZ: So, thank you. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: You're entirely welcome. Thank you 
for testifying. 

Next, Bob Nelson, President of Nelson Communications. 

MR. NELSON: Mr. Chairman, thank you, and Members of 
the Committee. 

My name is Robert Nelson. I am the Chairman of a 
company with offices in six cities, including three offices in 
this state. 

It's been my distinct honor to know Ms. Padberg for 
21 years. During that time, I've known her to be a person of 
integrity. I think most important relative to this Commission 
appointment is, she's a person of very strong traditional 



49 
American family values. Those values being: hard work, 
honesty, and a sense of equality. 

I would just say to you that I think that one of the 
most outstanding aspects of her public life has been not that 
she seeks special preference for women, but rather that she 
seeks that they attain a position of full equality in our 
society. 

I urge your recommendation of her. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Thank you very much. 

Next, I guess we go back to Ms. Padberg. Do you have 
anything further to say? 

MS. PADBERG: I don't, unless you have any questions. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Do the Members have any questions? 

Is there anyone who wishes to speak in favor or 
opposition? Come, dear. 

MS. CARPENTER: Aleta Carpenter. I'm not 
representing any client today. 

I just wanted to let you know that as a woman in 
California, there's no one I'd rather have representing me. 

I seek your favorable vote. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Very good, thank you very much. 

MS. PADBERG: I feel like "This Is Your Life." 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Anyone else who wishes to speak? 

We're sorry that the Congressman couldn't make it. 

[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Did he advise us that he was coming? 



50 

MS. MICHEL: He was the one who requested the hearing 
to begin with. He's the person that asked that we have her 
appear. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Oh, really? 

He was really very anxious to see you. 

SENATOR PETRI S: Mr. Chairman. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Yes, Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: I have a New York Times article that 
I referred to earlier, and it's truly a very, very serious 
matter. We kind of laughed it off, and you had indicated, well, 

there are no Robertson people here, which I'm happy to note. 

12 

But I think that women who are taking the lead in the 

13 

fight for women's rights, whether it's through the Equal Rights 



l 

2 
3 
4 
5 

! 
7 

8 
10 



II 



14 

15 
16 
17 
18 



19 
20 

21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



Amendment, or Status of Women Commission, or so forth, are going 
to be under severe attack from certain quarters. I just wanted 
to alert the women who are here and testified that they ought to 
be aware of this. 

If you'd care to comment, okay, but I'm not asking 
you to do so. 

It says, "A Letter from Pat Robertson Regarding the 
Equal Rights Amendment" in Iowa, the Equal Rights Amendment to 
the Iowa Constitution. It's dated August 25th. He sent the 
letter to supports of an evangelical Christian coalition, 
describing it as: 

"... part of a feminist agenda that 
is not about equal rights for women. 
Instead ..." 



I 

2 



51 
and this is a direct quote, 

"it is about a socialist, anti- 
family, political movement that 
encourages women to leave their 
husbands, kill their children, 
practice witchcraft, destroy 
capitalism, and become lesbians." 
That's from Robertson! I mean, he was a serious candidate for 
President of this country. 

It's something we need to take note of, it seems to 
me, in this context of a nominee for a very important commission 
that we have, although it may be wiped out by our budget 
problems. You're aware of that. 
MS. PADBERG: Right. 

SENATOR PETRIS: I don't know if this has come to 
your attention. It's today's paper. I'll give you a copy of 
this. 

I think all women who are in the forefront, or even 
just members of one of the organizations, should be made aware 
of this. I think it's despicable. 
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: You're entirely welcome. 
Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I'm prepared to make a motion. 
SENATOR CRAVEN: Let's go with your motion. 
SENATOR BEVERLY: I move we recommend confirmation. 
SENATOR CRAVEN: All right, it's been recommended 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



52 
that Ms. Padberg be confirmed. 

Call the roll, please. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 

Senator Petris. 

SENATOR PETRIS: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Petris Aye. 

Senator Craven. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Craven Aye. 

Senator Roberti. 

Four to zero. 

SENATOR CRAVEN: You're confirmed to the Floor. 
Congratulations . 

MS. PADBERG: Thank you. 

[Thereupon the final vote for 
confirmation was 5-0, as Senator 
Robert i's aye vote was added 
pursuant to Senate Rule 28.7] 
[Thereupon this portion of the 
Senate Rules Committee hearing 
was terminated at approximately 
4:00 P.M. ] 

— ooOoo — 



53 
CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER 

I, EVELYN J. MIZAK, a Shorthand Reporter of 
the State of California, do hereby certify: 

That I am a disinterested person herein; 
that the foregoing Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
reported verbatim in shorthand by me, Evelyn Mizak, and 
thereafter transcribed into typewriting. 

I further certify that I am not of counsel 
or attorney for any of the parties to said hearing, nor in 
any way interested in the outcome of said hearing. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my 

13 ip^ 

hand this- r^-fl day of August, 1992. 

15 

16 

17 

^ELYtf J. XtZAK 
•8 Shorthand Reporter 

19 
20 
21 

22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 




211-R 

Additional copies of this publication may be purchased for $5.00 per copy 
plus current California sales tax. 

Senate Publications 

11 00 J Street, Room B- 15 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Make checks payable to SENATE RULES COMMITTEE. 
Please include Senate Publication Number 211-R when ordering. 




SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



HEARING 




STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



SUNDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1992 
7:04 P.M. 



;UMEi\ 



BAN FRAN-' 

I -• | | r-- i . * 



212-R 



SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



HEARING 



STATE CAPITOL 
ROOM 3191 
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



SUNDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1992 
7:04 P.M. 



Reported by: 



Evelyn J. Mizak 
Shorthand Reporter 



11 

APPEARANCES 

MEMBERS PRESENT 

SENATOR DAVID ROBERT I , Chair 

SENATOR WILLIAM CRAVEN, Vice Chair 

SENATOR ROBERT BEVERLY 

SENATOR HENRY MELLO 

MEMBERS ABSENT 

SENATOR NICHOLAS PETRIS 

STAFF PRESENT 

CLIFF BERG, Executive Officer 

PAT WEBB, Committee Secretary 

NANCY MICHEL, Consultant on Governor's Appointments 

ALSO PRESENT 

A. VERNON CONRAD, Member 

California Regional Water Quality Control Board 

Central Valley Region 

GEORGE N. ZENOVICH, Lobbyist 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



ill 
INDEX 

Page 
Proceedings 1 

Governor's Appointees; 

A. VERNON CONRAD, Member 

California Regional Water Quality Control Board 

Central Valley Region 1 

Witness in Support; 

GEORGE N. ZENOVICH, Lobbyist 2 

Questions by CHAIRMAN ROBERTI re; 

Testimony of Former-Congressman KREBS 3 

Position on Development Projects 4 

Instances of Environmental Sensitivity 4 

Opposition to CEQA 4 

Statements by CHAIRMAN ROBERTI re: Intention 

to Vote for Confirmation 6 

Motion to Confirm 6 

Committee Action 7 

Termination of Proceedings 7 

Certificate of Reporter 8 



1 

P-R-G-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 
— 00O00 — 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI : We have one item on our agenda 
this evening, and that is the confirmation of A. Vernon Conrad, 
Member of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, 
Central Valley Region. 

Mr. Conrad, please come forward. 

The last time Mr. Conrad's confirmation was before 
us, I think the vote was 2-2 in Committee, one abstention, so we 
are convening here today. 

We'll ask you briefly — I think you went through a 
hearing already, and the text of that hearing is available to us 
— v;e'll ask you just briefly to tell us why you feel you're 
qualified to assume this position. 

MR. CONRAD: Well, Mr. Chairman and Senators, I 
apologize for taking up your Sunday afternoon, your Sunday 
evening, and all of the staff as veil. But I certainly solicit 
a favorable vote. 

I think I have a real broad base of support. I think 
you have received support from all of the counties in my region 
which unanimously supported me for this position. 

Throughout the years, I have spent a significant 
amount of time in preparation for such as this. I've spent a 
lot of time in water matters. I've spent a couple years as the 
Chairman of the Water Problems Committee for the Farm Bureau 
organization. I've spent nine years on the Board as Chairman of 
the Alta Irrigation District Board. I've spent five years on 



2 

the Board of the Kings River Conservation District. I also 
served on the Kings River Water Association Executive Committee. 

I feel that I have the background, the knowledge, and 
I'm certainly prepared to continue to serve on this Board and do 
a good job. 

I would assure you that I am not a rubber stamp of 
anybody. I make up my own mind, and I do my homework. I read 
all of the material and — which is a great volume of it that 
comes to members of the Board. 

And I do have a — I think, a real responsible 
position as far as the environment's concerned. I live by the 
environment; I'm a farmer. 

And therefore, I think I'm qualified for the job, and 
I would ask you to consider me favorably. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Is there anyone here in support? 
Yes, former-Senator George Zenovich. 

MR. ZENOVICH: Mr. Chairman and Members, if I may, I, 
too, want to apologize for inconveniencing you all this evening. 

I've known Mr. Conrad for many, many years. I have 
respected his work generally in the water field. As a matter of 
fact, when I was in the Legislature, he was one of the people 
that I used to call upon to get advice on how to vote, what 
direction to take on water issues. 

In my opinion, he's emine 



1 

2 

3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 

9 
10 
11 

'2 

13 

14 

15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 



3 

involving a land use change . Some gentleman wanted to put in a 
race track in an area in Fresno, and no environmental report was 
available. And Mr. Conrad was one of two votes against making 
this change at that time because of the lack of an environmental 
report . 

So, I'm here — 

SENATOR BEVERLY: That wasn't Senator Maddy; was it? 

MR. ZENOVICH: No, no. 

[Laughter. ] 

MR. ZENOVICH: This is an automobile race track. 
Different kind of race track. 

Thank you . 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Thank you. 

Is there anyone here in opposition? 

In the last two hearings, there was some concern from 
one of your colleagues on the Board of Supervisors that, as he 
put it, the only time you voted against any development interest 
was when it was in your district. 

Is that normally — 

MR. CONRAD: Excuse me, sir. I don't think there was 
any -- that was former-Congressman Krebs . 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Oh, that was a Congressman. 

MR. CONRAD: Yes. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: He never was a Supervisor? 

MR. CONRAD: Yes, he was a Supervisor, but not at the 



26 

same time that I've been a Supervisor. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Well whatever, that was his 

28 



4 
allegation, which you only voted against — you only used 
discernment in these questions when it involved your own 
district; otherwise, you pretty much — 

MR. CONRAD: Well — 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Since I wasn't at the two 
hearings, unfortunately, I try to glean your ideas. 

MR. CONRAD: The Congressman isn't here, so I 
wouldn't — I think it's probably best for me not to comment on 
it. 

I would say one thing. Contrary to what the 
Congressman said, I did take a very active role in his defeat 
for re-election, and I'm sure that didn't have any bearing on 
his testimony at all. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: All right. 

Then I guess the other points were some concerns by 
both the Sierra Club and the Planning and Conservation League. 

It's not a requirement, of course, that they endorse 
you, but, I mean, their opposition is serious in a water 
question. 

I would like you, maybe, to perhaps address some 
instances where you have, you know, shown sensitivity to 
environmental questions . 

MR. CONRAD: Well, as I've stated before, I certainly 
am in favor of CEQA. I think that intent — 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI : I think there was some testimony 
that you were opposed to CEQA. That's not the case? 

MR. CONRAD: That's not the case. 



5 

I did make a statement, probably, one time in a 
certain time. You know, when you're an elected official, 
there's a lot of times you'd best just not say anything, but 
that's not been my method. I am rather outspoken, and sometimes 
I may have gotten into difficulty. 

What I did say was that I was not in favor of using 
the CEQA or the Act to prevent projects from — just creating a 
problem for projects if there wasn't a real reason for that. 

I certainly support gathering all of the information. 
I believe that's what the intent of the Act is, and then the 
governing body to assess all of those impacts and, to the best 
possible ability, to compensate for them. And I think that's 
necessary. 

But I don't believe in just holding up projects and 
creating a monetary problem over and over to stop something. In 
a lot of cases, that's what environmental impact considerations 
are used for today. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Thank you. 

MR. CONRAD: And I would like — I think you have in 
your support there an indication of people who are members of 
the Sierra Club, not the club itself. But I received letters 
from a couple of members of the Sierra Club in my support. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Well, are there any other 
questions from the Committee? 

Does anyone else in the audience wish to speak on the 
appointment? 

I guess I was at that time, supposedly, a swing vote 



6 
because I wasn't here. I do intend to vote for your 
confirmation. 

I think you do have a number of people whom I respect 
supporting you, and although I'm a little bit concerned about 
some of your positions, I've generally felt it's not my position 
to second-guess a choice of the Governor unless it ' s a grievous 
policy difference, or a grievous ethical question. It's none of 
those. 

And the policy is that the Governor was elected to be 
the Governor of the State, and I have voted against some of his 
appointments, but I think the case has to be somewhat 
overwhelming for me to cast that kind of a vote. 

So, I do intend to vote for your confirmation. 

Any other observations from the Committee? Do I hear 
a motion? 

SENATOR BEVERLY: I'm prepared to move, Mr. Chairman, 
that we recommend the confirmation. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI : Senator Beverly moves that 
confirmation be recommended to the Floor. 

Secretary will call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Beverly. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Beverly Aye. 

Senator Mello. 

SENATOR MELLO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Mello Aye. 

Senator Petris . Senator Craven. Senator Roberti. 



7 
CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Aye. 
SECRETARY WEBB: Robert! Aye. 
Three to zero. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: The vote is three to zero; 
confirmation is recommended to the Floor. We'll take it up 
tomorrow . 

Congratulations . 

MR. CONRAD: Thank you very much, and again, I 
apologize for taking your Sunday evening. 

CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: Your drop-dead date, 
unfortunately, was before we would be coming back. 

SENATOR BEVERLY: What about Senator Craven? 
CHAIRMAN ROBERTI: I would like to leave it on for 
him. Well, let's leave the call. 

[Thereafter, the call was lifted, 
Senator Craven voted in favor of the 
confirmation, and the final vote was 
4-0 to recommend confirmation.] 
[Thereupon this portion of the 
Senate Rules Committee hearing 
was terminated at approximately 
7:17 P.M. ] 

— ooOoo — 



CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER 

I, EVELYN J. MIZAK, a Shorthand Reporter of 
the State of California, do hereby certify: 

That I am a disinterested person herein; 
that the foregoing Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
reported verbatim in shorthand by me, Evelyn Mizak, and 
thereafter transcribed into typewriting. 

I further certify that I am not of counsel 
or attorney for any of the parties to said hearing, nor in 
any way interested in the outcome of said hearing. 



Lis / 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my 

K 



hand this / day of December, 1992. 





EVELY^ Jj^falZAK O 
Shorthand Reporter 



212-R 

Additional copies of this publication may be purchased for $4.00 per copy 
plus 7.75% California sales tax. 

Senate Publications 

11 00 J Street, Room B-15 

Sacramento, CA 95814 



Make checks payable to SENATE RULES COMMITTEE. 
Please include Senate Publication Number 212-R when orderim